POPULARITY
49 episodes with Stafford Beer
7 episodes with Stafford Beer
5 episodes with Stafford Beer
4 episodes with Stafford Beer
3 episodes with Stafford Beer
2 episodes with Stafford Beer
2 episodes with Stafford Beer
2 episodes with Stafford Beer
4 episodes with Stafford Beer
Der Titel der heutigen Episode ist »Zeitlos«. Wie komme ich darauf? Die Motivation für diese kurze Episode der Reflexion ist eine Reihe von Tweets. Der erste war von Axel Bojanowski, dem — wie ich meine — führenden Wissenschaftsjournalisten im deutschsprachigen Raum. Er schreibt: »Der mit Abstand beste deutsche Wissenschaftspodcast ist Zukunft Denken« Natürlich freut mich eine solche Empfehlung aus derartig berufenem Munde ganz besonders. Es spornt auch an, weiter hart an diesem Projekt zu arbeiten. Es gab dann aber noch eine Reaktion eines Hörers, der den Aspekt der Zeitlosigkeit der Episoden betont hat. Das hat mich zum Nachdenken angeregt. Der erste Aspekt von Zeit ist ein eher banaler, aber einer, auf den ich gerne kurz eingehen möchte. Ich bekomme immer wieder Zuschriften, wo sich Hörer öfter neue Folgen wünschen. Warum das schwierig ist, erkläre ich in aller Kürze. Dann aber zu weiteren Aspekten der Zeitlosigkeit, die eher inhaltlicher Natur sind, denn dieser Kommentar hat mich zum Nachdenken gebracht zumal es einige Überschneidungen zu vorigen Episoden gibt. Was hat etwas das Zitat von Gerd Gigerenzer aus Episode 122 »Je größer die Unsicherheit ist, desto mehr Informationen muss man ignorieren.« mit dem Zitat von Stafford Beer aus Episode 121 gemein? »Information and Action are one and the same thing« Zur Dimension der Informationsdichte kommt noch die Dimension der Zeit auf eine sehr interessante Weise hinzu. Je Größer die Unsicherheit, desto wichtiger ist also nicht nur die Auswahl der Parameter, der Daten, sondern auch die richtige Zeitlichkeit im Umgang mit dem Problem. Was bedeutet dies für News? Für den gesellschaftlichen und politischen Umgang mit komplexen Problemen? »Die relevanten Information entstehen Wochen, Monate, bei aktivistischen Großereignissen wie etwa Covid auch Jahre später. Diese geht dann aber im Lärm des nächsten Events unter.« Fortschritt und Entschleunigung haben aber eine durchaus interessante Gemeinsamkeit, wir Herfried Münkler bemerkt: “...Chance des Reflexionsgewinns durch Entschleunigung: Man kann die Bedeutung beim Treffen von Entscheidungen über größere Zeitspannen zu verfügen kaum überschätzen. und diese Zeitspannengewinn hängt nun einmal am Übergang vom mündlichen zum schriftlichen.” […] »Man konnte nunmehr sehr viel komplexere Fragen zum Gegenstand von Beratungen machen, als das in den direkten partizipatorischen Formen der Antike möglich war. Und man konnte Herausforderungen und Probleme in längerfristigen Perspektiven ins Auge fassen.« Sind wir immer am Puls der Zeit? Oder sind wir eher am Puls des Rauschens? Warum gibt es keine Wissenschafts-News und warum ist es gerade in komplexen Zeiten wichtig, Abstand von schnellen Medien zu halten? Warum sind Bücher gerade in schnellen Zeiten von besonderer Bedeutung? Wie kann man die Welt in Schichten verschiedener Geschwindigkeiten begreifen? Stewart Brand bezeichnet dies als Pace Layering: »Build a thing too fast, and mistakes cascade. Build a thing at the right pace, and mistakes instruct. Build a thing too slow, and mistakes are forgotten, then endlessly repeated in the endless restarts. For instance, with infrastructure: Building a thing at the right pace steadily all the way to completion probably works best with: Continuity of control Protected and guided by continuity of oversight and Guided by continuously monitored undersight—from workers and early customers. Continuity is the key.« Was aber machen wir mit Systemen — um wieder auf Stafford Beer zurückzukommen — deren tatsächlicher Zweck sich vom deklarierten Zweck entfernt hat? Wir enden nochmals mit einem Zitat von Stewart Brand: »Fast learns, slow remembers. Fast proposes, slow disposes. Fast is discontinuous, slow is continuous. Fast and small instructs slow and big by accrued innovation and by occasional revolution. Slow and big controls small and fast by constraint and constancy. Fast gets all our attention, slow has all the power.« Was haben Sie mitgenommen? Schreiben Sie mir! Referenzen Podcast Umfrage — Bitte teilnehmen! Andere Episoden Episode 122: Komplexitätsillusion oder Heuristik, ein Gespräch mit Gerd Gigerenzer Episode 121: Künstliche Unintelligenz Episode 119: Spy vs Spy: Über künstlicher Intelligenz und anderen Agenten Episode 104: Aus Quantität wird Qualität Episode 99: Entkopplung, Kopplung, Rückkopplung Episode 92: Wissen und Expertise Teil 2 Episode 84: (Epistemische) Krisen? Ein Gespräch mit Jan David Zimmermann Episode 80: Wissen, Expertise und Prognose, eine Reflexion Episode 49: Wo denke ich? Reflexionen über den »undichten« Geist Episode 47: Große Worte Episode 32: Überleben in der Datenflut – oder: warum das Buch wichtiger ist als je zuvor Fachliche Referenzen Tweet von Axel Bojanowski (2025) Herfried Münkler, Verkleinern und entschleunigen. Die Zukunft der Demokratie? ARD (2022) Stewart Brand, Pace Layering: How Complex Systems Learn and Keep Learning (2018) Stewart Brand, How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They're Built, Penguin (1995)
Diese Folge von Future Histories ist eine Aufzeichnung der Buchvorstellung von 'Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond'. Aufgezeichnet am 4. März 2025 im Aquarium am Südblock, Berlin. Die Diskussion wurde von Jonna Klick, Christoph Sorg und Jan Groos geführt. Jacob Blumenfeld übernahm die Moderation und Ko-Organisation. Danke!! Shownotes Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (Hrsg.). (2025). Creative Construction. Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction Brumaire Verlag: https://brumaireverlag.de/ Drau, I., & Klick, J. (2024). Alles für alle. Revolution als Commonisierung. Schmetterling Verlag. https://schmetterling-verlag.de/produkt/alles-fuer-alle/ Berfelde, R., & Blumenfeld, J. (2024). Von der Vergesellschaftung zur Planung und wieder zurück. PROKLA. Zeitschrift Für Kritische Sozialwissenschaft, 54(215), 177–193. https://www.prokla.de/index.php/PROKLA/article/view/2119 Blumenfeld, J. (2024a). Managing Decline. Cured Quail, Vol. 3. https://curedquail.com/Managing-Decline Christoph Sorg's Website: https://christophsorg.wordpress.com/ Das DFG Forschungsprojekt „Capitalist Planned Economies“ (CaPE): https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/523931583?context=projekt&task=showDetail&id=523931583& Jan Groos‘ Website: https://www.jan-groos.de/ueber/ Daum, T., & Nuss, S. (Hrsg.). (2021). Die unsichtbare Hand des Plans: Koordination und Kalkül im digitalen Kapitalismus. Dietz. https://dietzberlin.de/produkt/die-unsichtbare-hand-des-plans/ zur Conferedación Nacional del Trabajo (CNT): https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederaci%C3%B3n_Nacional_del_Trabajo zur Arbeiterselbstverwaltung im ehemaligen Jugoslawien: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbeiterselbstverwaltung Laibman, D. (2024). Multilevel Democratic Iterative Coordination (MDIC): A Path for Socialism beyond the Market/Central Planning Dilemma. World Review of Political Economy, 15(1). https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.15.1.0004 zu „strategischem Management“: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategisches_Management das Juli 2024 Symposium zu „Planning, Democracy and Postcapitalism” in Montpellier: https://innovationsocialeusp.ca/en/event/international-symposium-planning-democracy-and-post-capitalism? zur Bandung-Konferenz: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandung-Konferenz UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development): https://unctad.org/ zu Johanna Bockman: https://soan.gmu.edu/people/jbockman Menon, N. (2022). Planning Democracy. How a Professor, an Institute, and an Idea Shaped India. Penguin. https://www.penguin.co.in/book/planning-democracy/ Devine, P. (2010). Democracy and Economic Planning. Polity Press. https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=democracy-and-economic-planning--9780745634791 Holland, S. (Hrsg.). (1987). Beyond Capitalist Planning. Spokesman Books. https://spokesmanbooks.org/product/span-stylefont-size-14pxbeyond-capitalist-planningspan/ zu Karl Georg Zinn: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Georg_Zinn zum Meidner Plan in Schweden: https://jacobin.de/artikel/rudolf-meidner-der-radikale-reformer-sozialdemokratie-meidner-plan-olof-palme Herrmann, U. (2022). Das Ende des Kapitalismus: Warum Wachstum und Klimaschutz nicht vereinbar sind – und wie wir in Zukunft leben werden. Kiepenheuer & Witsch. https://www.kiwi-verlag.de/buch/ulrike-herrmann-das-ende-des-kapitalismus-9783462007015 Monnet. E. (2022). Economic Planning and War Economy in the Context of Ecological Crises. Géopolitique, Réseau, Énergie, Environnement, Nature. Nr.2. https://geopolitique.eu/en/articles/economic-planning-and-war-economy-in-the-context-of-ecological-crisis/ zu Otto Neurath: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Neurath Malm, A. (2020). Corona, Clima, Chronic Emergency. War Communism in the Twenty-First Century. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2726-corona-climate-chronic-emergency?srsltid=AfmBOopCynAI9ExjEyM3afkrHjnImg1Jm6FZJlM-WpPNCnxW9OFcdODK Dyer-Witheford, N. (2013). Red Plenty Platforms. Culture Machine. Vol.14. https://culturemachine.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/511-1153-1-PB.pdf Mazzucato, M. (2023). Das Kapital des Staates. Eine andere Geschichte von Innovation und Wachstum. Campus. https://www.campus.de/buecher-campus-verlag/wirtschaft-gesellschaft/wirtschaft/das_kapital_des_staates-17562.html Medina, E. (2014). Cybernetic Revolutionaries. Technology and Politics in Allende's Chile. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262525961/cybernetic-revolutionaries/ zum Viable System Model von Stafford Beer: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_System_Model zu Claus Offe: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_Offe Sorg, C. (2023). Failing to Plan Is Planning to Fail: Toward an Expanded Notion of Democratically Planned Postcapitalism. Critical Sociology, 49(3), 475-493. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08969205221081058 Roediger, D. R. (2022). The Wages of Whiteness. Race and the Making of the American Working Class. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2966-the-wages-of-whiteness?srsltid=AfmBOor8SkRvz6R9Us-sV0X8KbM1Kgx19KsUaalsFo5DxO-9UxTpN6Eg zur “Socialist Calculation Debate”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_calculation_debate Grünberg, M. (2023). The Planning Daemon: Future Desire and Communal Production. Historical Materialism, 31(4), 115-159. https://brill.com/view/journals/hima/31/4/article-p115_4.xml zum Begriff des „Phantombesitzes“ bei Eva von Redecker: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUQcOETh_y0 Rochowicz, N. (2025). Planning progress: Incorporating Innovation and Structural Change into Models of Economic Planning. Competition & Change, 29(1), 64-82. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10245294231220690 Rikap, C. (2021). Capitalism, Power and Innovation: Intellectual Monopoly Capitalism Uncovered. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Capitalism-Power-and-Innovation-Intellectual-Monopoly-Capitalism-Uncovered/Rikap/p/book/9780367750299?srsltid=AfmBOoohn2o3_THE5S57rt4kTs62Fp3kv5AUNj8rUTdn7ywK9LFhfEro Thematisch angrenzende Folgen S03E32 | Jacob Blumenfeld on Climate Barbarism and Managing Decline https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e32-jacob-blumenfeld-on-climate-barbarism-and-managing-decline/ S03E34 | Cecilia Rikap on Intellectual Monopoly Capitalism and Corporate Power in the Age of AI https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e34-cecilia-rikap-on-intellectual-monopoly-capitalism-and-corporate-power-in-the-age-of-ai/ S03E33 | Tadzio Müller zu solidarischem Preppen im Kollaps https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e33-tadzio-mueller-zu-solidarischem-preppen-im-kollaps/ S03E29 | Nancy Fraser on Alternatives to Capitalism https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e29-nancy-fraser-on-alternatives-to-capitalism/ S03E24 | Grace Blakeley on Capitalist Planning and its Alternatives https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e24-grace-blakeley-on-capitalist-planning-and-its-alternatives/ S03E21 | Christoph Sorg zu Finanzwirtschaft als Planung https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e21-christoph-sorg-zu-finanzwirtschaft-als-planung/ S03E18 | Indigo Drau und Jonna Klick zu Revolution als Commonisierung https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e18-indigo-drau-und-jonna-klick-zu-revolution-als-commonisierung/ S02E42 | Max Grünberg zum Planungsdämon https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e42-max-gruenberg-zum-planungsdaemon/ S02E38 | Eva von Redecker zu Bleibefreiheit und Demokratischer Planung https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e38-eva-von-redecker-zu-bleibefreiheit-und-demokratischer-planung/ S02E19 | David Laibman on Multilevel Democratic Iterative Coordination https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e19-david-laibman-on-multilevel-democratic-iterative-coordination/ --- Bei weiterem Interesse am Thema demokratische Wirtschaftsplanung können diese Ressourcen hilfreich sein: Demokratische Planung – eine Infoseite https://www.demokratische-planung.de/ Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (Hrsg.).(2025). Rethinking Economic Planning. Competition & Change Special Issue Volume 29 Issue 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ccha/29/1 Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (Hrsg.). (2025). Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction International Network for Democratic Economic Planning https://www.indep.network/ Democratic Planning Research Platform: https://www.planningresearch.net/ --- Future Histories Kontakt & Unterstützung Wenn euch Future Histories gefällt, dann erwägt doch bitte eine Unterstützung auf Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Schreibt mir unter: office@futurehistories.today Diskutiert mit mir auf Twitter (#FutureHistories): https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast auf Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/futurehistories.bsky.social auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ auf Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories Webseite mit allen Folgen: www.futurehistories.today English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com Episode Keywords #CreativeConstruction, #ChristophSorg, #JanGroos, #JonnaKlick, #JacobBlumenfeld, #FutureHistories, #Podcast, #Postkapitalismus, #Sozialismus, #Kommunismus, #Markt, #DemokratischePlanung, #Vergesellschaftung, #PostkapitalistischeReproduktion, #Planungsdebatte, #DemokratischePlanwirtschaft, #Investition, #Transformation, #KapitalistischePlanung, #Marktsozialismus, #Meidner-Plan, #Markt-Koordination, #Utopie
In dieser Folge steht das Thema »Künstliche Unitelligenz« im Mittelpunkt – ein Begriff, der aus einem Artikel aus dem Spectator stammt: Britain has become a pioneer in Artificial Unintelligence. Was genau verbirgt sich hinter dieser Idee? »Artificial Unintelligence is the means by which people of perfectly adequate natural intelligence are transformed by policies, procedures and protocols into animate but inflexible cogs. They speak and behave, but do not think or decide.« Wie werden aus Menschen mit natürlicher Intelligenz bloß unflexible Rädchen? Wir reflektieren die zunehmende Strukturierung und Standardisierung in Organisationen, um mit wachsender gesellschaftlicher Komplexität umgehen zu können. Ein Ausgangspunkt der Episode ist die Frage, warum wir in immer mehr Organisationen eine strukturelle und individuelle Inkompetenz erleben? Ein Zitat aus dem genannten Artikel fasst es treffend zusammen: »‘I didn't find anything in common in these cases,' I said, ‘except the stupidity of your staff. I expected him to get angry, but he maintained a Buddha-like calm. ‘Oh, I know,' he replied, ‘but that is the standard expected now.'« Wie konnte es so weit kommen? Liegt es an der Industrialisierung, die laut Dan Davies in The Unaccountability Machine besagt: »A very important consequence of industrialisation is that it breaks the connection between the worker and the product.« Oder hat es damit zu tun, wie wir mit Überwältungung durch Information umgehen. »When people are overwhelmed by information, they always react in the same way – by building systems.« Sind Menschen, die individuell denken, in solchen Systemen eher hinderlich als hilfreich? Doch was passiert, wenn komplexe Probleme auftreten, die Flexibilität und Kreativität erfordern? Sind unsere Organisationen überhaupt noch in der Lage, mit unerwarteten Situationen umzugehen, oder arbeiten sie nur noch »maschinenhaft« nach Vorgaben – und das mit einem Maschinenverständnis des 19. Jahrhunderts? Ist die Stagnation, die wir seit Jahrzehnten spüren, ein Symptom dieses Systemversagens? Und wie hängt das mit der sogenannten »Unaccountability Machine« zusammen, die Davies beschreibt und die man im Deutschen vielleicht als »Verantwortungslosigkeits-Maschine« bezeichnen könnte? Kann es sogar sein, dass manche Strukturen bewusst als »self-organising control fraud« gestaltet sind? Ein weiteres damit verbundenes Thema ist: Wie beeinflussen moderne Prognose-Tools wie Recommender Systems unser Verhalten? Dienen sie wirklich dazu, bessere Entscheidungen zu ermöglichen, oder machen sie uns hauptsächlich vorhersagbarer? »Menschen, die dies und jedes gekauft/gesehen haben, haben auch dies gekauft/gesehen« – ist das noch Prognose oder schon Formung des Geschmacks? Und was ist mit wissenschaftlichen Modellen komplexer Systeme, die oft relativ beliebige Ergebnisse liefern? Formen sie nicht auch die Meinung von Wissenschaftlern, Politikern und der Gesellschaft – etwa durch die überall beobachtbare schlichte Medienberichterstattung? Bleibt außerdem der Mensch wirklich »in the loop«, wie oft behauptet wird, oder ist er längst ein »artificial unintelligent man in the loop«, der Empfehlungen des Systems kaum hinterfragen kann? Die Episode wirft auch einen kritischen Blick auf naive Ideologien wie das »Scientific World Management« von Alfred Korzybski, der schrieb: „it will give a scientific foundation to Political Economy and transform so-called ‘scientific shop management' into genuine ‘scientific world management.'“ War dieser Wunsch nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg verständlich, aber letztlich völlig missgeleitet? Und warum erleben wir heute eine Wiederkehr des naiven Szientismus, der glaubt, »die Wissenschaft« liefere objektive Antworten? Wie hängen solche Ideen mit Phänomenen wie »Science Diplomacy« zusammen? Die zentrale Frage der Episode lautet: Wie erreicht man, dass Menschen in Verantwortung korrekt im Sinne des definierten Zwecks der Organisation entscheiden? Doch was ist überhaupt der Zweck eines Systems? Stafford Beer sagt: »The purpose of a system is what it does.« Stimmt der definierte Zweck – etwa Gesundheit im Gesundheitssystem – noch mit der Realität überein? Warum entscheiden Ärzte oft defensiv im eigenen Interesse statt im Interesse der Patienten? Und wie überträgt sich dieses Verhalten auf andere Organisationen – von Ministerien bis hin zur Wissenschaft? Davies beschreibt das ab Beispiel des akademischen Publikationswesens so: „A not-wholly-unfair analysis of academic publishing would be that it is an industry in which academics compete against one another for the privilege of providing free labour for a profitmaking company, which then sells the results back to them at monopoly prices.“ Und weiter: „The truly valuable output of the academic publishing industry is not journals, but citations.“ Was ist aus der Idee geworden, dass die Generierung von neuem und relevantem Wissen die Aufgabe von Wissenschaft, Förderung und Publikationswesen ist? Zum Abschluss stelle ich die Frage: Wie können Systeme so gestaltet werden, dass Verantwortung wieder übernommen wird? Wie balanciert man die Zuordnung von Konsequenzen mit der Möglichkeit, ehrlich zu scheitern – ohne Innovation zu ersticken? Und was sind »Luxury Beliefs« – jene modischen Ideen elitärer Kreise, die sie selbst nicht tragen müssen, während sie für andere zur existenziellen Bedrohung werden? Die Episode endet so mit einem Aufruf zur Diskussion: Wie lösen wir diesen Spagat zwischen Verantwortung und Risiko in einer immer komplexeren Welt? Referenzen Andere Episoden Episode 119: Spy vs Spy: Über künstlicher Intelligenz und anderen Agenten Episode 118: Science and Decision Making under Uncertainty, A Conversation with Prof. John Ioannidis Episode 117: Der humpelnde Staat, ein Gespräch mit Prof. Christoph Kletzer Episode 116: Science and Politics, A Conversation with Prof. Jessica Weinkle Episode 106: Wissenschaft als Ersatzreligion? Ein Gespräch mit Manfred Glauninger Episode 103: Schwarze Schwäne in Extremistan; die Welt des Nassim Taleb, ein Gespräch mit Ralph Zlabinger Episode 93: Covid. Die unerklärliche Stille nach dem Sturm. Ein Gespräch mit Jan David Zimmermann Episode 91: Die Heidi-Klum-Universität, ein Gespräch mit Prof. Ehrmann und Prof. Sommer Episode 84: (Epistemische) Krisen? Ein Gespräch mit Jan David Zimmermann Fachliche Referenzen Britain has become a pioneer in Artificial Unintelligence | The Spectator (2025) Davies, Dan. The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions - and How The World Lost its Mind, Profile Books (2024) Alfred Korzybski, Manhood of Humanity (1921) Jessica Weinkle, What is Science Diplomacy (2025) Nassim Taleb, Skin in the Game, Penguin (2018) Rob Henderson, 'Luxury beliefs' are latest status symbol for rich Americans, New York Post (2019) Lorraine Daston, Rules, Princeton Univ. Press (2023)
Die heutige Episode hat wieder viel Spaß gemacht. Zu Gast ist Prof. Christoph Kletzer. Ich bin auf ihn gestoßen über einen Artikel in der Presse mit dem Titel »Der humpelnde Staat« — und das soll auch der Titel dieser Episode sein. Prof. Christoph Kletzer ist Professor am King's College London und eine profilierte Stimme in politischen Debatten. »Eine seltsame Krankheit hat unsere europäische Staatsordnung befallen: Sie interessiert sich immer stärker für die kleinsten Details unseres Lebens, wird immer einfallsreicher bei der Tiefenregulierung des Alltags, lässt uns aber mit unseren brennendsten Nöten allein.« Wir beginnen mit der Frage nach den immer stärker werdenden staatlichen Eingriffen. Welche Beispiele kann man dafür nennen? »Im Grunde haben wir alle so kleine Sandboxen, in denen wir spielen dürfen« Und dennoch verlieren viele der westlichen Staaten zunehmend die Fähigkeiten, ihre Kernaufgaben zu erfüllen. Erleben wir in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten einen zunehmenden Illiberalismus? Das Ganze scheint gepaart zu sein mit einer wachsenden Moralisierung aller möglichen Lebensbereiche. »Die Unfähigkeit im Großen wird durch aggressiven Kleingeist kompensiert.« Was ist die Rolle der einzelnen Akteure und des Systems? »Die Funktion des Systems ist das, was es tut« — »The purpose of a system is what it does«, Stafford Beer Woher kommt dieses Verrutschen des staatlichen Fokus? »Machtlosigkeit im Inneren wird mit technokratischem Verwaltungsstaatshandeln kompensiert. Das ist zum Teil in die DNA der Europäischen Union eingeschrieben.« Sie wird als Neo-Funktionalismus bezeichnet. Was bedeutet dies? Wurden wir in eine politische Einheit geschummelt? Wer hat eigentlich welche Kompetenz und wer trägt für welche Entscheidungen konkret Verantwortung? »Das wirkt mir eher nach FIFA als nach einem demokratischen System.« Oder wie der Komplexitätsforscher Peter Kruse es ausgedrückt hat: »In einem Krabbenkorb herrscht immer eine Mordsdynamik, aber bei genauerem Hinsehen stellt man fest, dass eigentlich nichts richtig vorwärtsgeht.« Wie kann man komplexe Systeme strukturieren oder Ordnung in komplexe Systeme bringen? Gibt es einen verfassungsrechtlichen Geburtsfehler in der EU? Kann man diesen noch beheben? Wird das Problem überhaupt diskutiert? Welche Rolle spielen Preise in der Selbstorganisation komplexer Wirtschaften? Kann Innovation als Arbitrage betrachtet werden? Wie viel kann bei einer komplexen Einheit wie der EU zentral gesteuert werden und wie viel muss sich durch selbstorganisierende Phänomene gestalten lassen? Sollten wir bei Kernaufgaben (was sind diese?) zentralistischer handeln und mehr Staat haben, aber beim Rest viel weniger Staat zulassen? Was können wir von der Situation in Argentinien und Javier Milei lernen? Warum sind Preiskontrollen fast immer eine verheerende Idee? Gleiten Top-Down organisierte, etatistische Systeme immer in Totalitarismus ab? Was sind Interventionsspiralen, wie entstehen sie und wie kann man sie vermeiden? Erleben wir eine Auflösung der regelbasierten globalen Ordnung und wie ist das zu bewerten, vor allem auch aus europäischer Perspektive? Werden wir vom Aufschwung, der aus Nationen wie den USA oder Argentinien kommt, überrollt; haben wir mit unserer Trägheit hier überhaupt noch eine Chance, mitzukommen? Gibt es eine »Angst vor Groß« in Europa? Dafür aber dominieren Sendungsbewusstsein und Hochmut? Wie spielt diese Angst zusammen mit einer der aktuell größten technologischen Veränderungen, der künstlichen Intelligenz? Haben wir es im politischen und bürokratischen Systemen mit einer Destillation der Inkompetenz zu tun? Oder liegt das Problem eher bei einer Politisierung der Justiz? »Die künftige Konfliktlage ist zwischen Justiz und Parlament.« Wer regiert eigentlich unsere Nationen? Politik oder »Deep State«? War der »Marsch durch die Institutionen« erfolgreich und hat unsere Nationen nachhaltig beschädigt? Wer hat eigentlich den Anreiz, in die öffentliche Verwaltung zu gehen? Braucht es die überschießende Rhetorik von Milei, um überhaupt eine Chance zu haben, den Stillstand zu beenden? »By liberty, was meant protection against the tyranny of the political rulers.«, John Stuart Mill Erleben wir eine Umkehrung der hart erkämpften Werte der Aktivisten des 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts? Ist der Schutz von Politikern wichtiger als die freie Meinungsäußerung? Wo sind wir hingeraten? Was bedeutet Liberalismus überhaupt und wie hat sich der Begriff verändert? Wie setzt sich der liberale Staat gegen seine Feinde zur Wehr? Aber wer entscheidet, wer der Feind ist Wie weit kann der Staat »neutral« bleiben, wie weit muss er Werte haben? Von der Wiege bis zur Bahre, vom Staat bevormundet? Ist das dann zu viel? Oder wollen das viele wirklich? »Die Schwierigkeit der Menschen, erwachsen zu werden, ist auch ein Wohlstandsphänomen. Der Wohlstand, den wir haben, führt auch zum ewigen Kind.« Aber dazu kommt noch eine weitere Dimension: »Auch die Hypermoral ist ja eine infantile Geschichte.« Woher kommen eigentlich die großen Veränderungen im späten 20. und 21. Jahrhundert? »Die neue Revolution ist nicht ausgegangen von der Arbeiterschaft, sondern von der administrativen Elite«, James Burnham Schafft der administrative Staat immer neue Situationen, die immer neue Eingriffe notwendig machen und die eigene Macht verstärken? Werden also immer neue paternalistische Strukturen notwendig, um die Probleme zu »lösen«, die selbst zuvor verursacht wurden? Und diese Problemlösung erzeugt wieder neue Probleme, die … Ist das Lösen der Probleme im Sinne der Machtstruktur gar nicht wünschenswert? Trifft dies nicht nur auf politische, sondern auch auf andere Organisationsstrukturen zu? Was ist die »eisige Nacht der polaren Kälte« nach Max Weber? Kann man eine Bürokratie der Debürokratisierung und damit eine Multiplikation des Problems vermeiden? Lässt sich dieses Dilemma rational, vernünftig lösen oder stecken wir hier in der Pathologie der Rationalität fest? Braucht es einen Clown, um den gordischen Knoten durchzuschlagen? Aber steckt in dieser Irrationalität nicht auch eine Gefahr? Welches unbekannte Know-how steckt — nach konservativer Logik — in den etablierten Strukturen? Stehen wir vor der Wahl einer tödlichen Verfettung oder einer gefährlichen Operation? Was wählen wir? Welches Hindernis stellt Statusdenken und Verhaften in Hierarchien dar? Signalisierung vor Bedeutung? Hilft das Denken von Foucault, um diese Problemlagen besser zu verstehen? »Academia has a tendency, when unchecked (from lack of skin in the game), to evolve into a ritualistic self-referential publishing game.«, Nassim Taleb Spielen wir in der Wissenschaft Cargo-Kult im 21. Jahrhundert? »Wenn man nur die richtigen Wörter sagt [passend zum jeweiligen Kult], dann ist es schon wahr.« Und der Cargo-Kult applaudiert. »Status können wir in Europa. Und Status ist per definitionem Abwendung von Realität.« Wie gehen wir in die Zukunft? »Ich bin für den Einzelnen optimistisch, fürs Kollektiv weniger.« Referenzen Andere Episoden Episode 111: Macht. Ein Gespräch mit Christine Bauer-Jelinek Episode 107: How to Organise Complex Societies? A Conversation with Johan Norberg Episode 106: Wissenschaft als Ersatzreligion? Ein Gespräch mit Manfred Glauninger Episode 103: Schwarze Schwäne in Extremistan; die Welt des Nassim Taleb, ein Gespräch mit Ralph Zlabinger Episode 99: Entkopplung, Kopplung, Rückkopplung Episode 96: Ist der heutigen Welt nur mehr mit Komödie beizukommen? Ein Gespräch mit Vince Ebert Episode 95: Geopolitik und Militär, ein Gespräch mit Brigadier Prof. Walter Feichtinger Episode 88: Liberalismus und Freiheitsgrade, ein Gespräch mit Prof. Christoph Möllers Episode 77: Freie Privatstädte, ein Gespräch mit Dr. Titus Gebel Episode 72: Scheitern an komplexen Problemen? Wissenschaft, Sprache und Gesellschaft — Ein Gespräch mit Jan David Zimmermann Christoph Kletzer Kings College X Fachliche Referenzen Christoph Kletzer, Presse Kommentar, Der humpelnde Staat: So geht sicher nichts weiter (2024) Stafford Beer, The Heart of Enterprise, Wiley (1979) Thomas Sowell, intellectuals and Society, Basic Books (2010) Friedrich von Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, Routledge (1944) John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859) David Graeber, The Dawn of Everything, A New History of Humanity, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux (2021) Max Weber, Politik als Beruf (1919) Nassim Taleb, Skin in the Game, Penguin (2018) Steven Brindle, Brunel: The Man Who Built the World, W&N (2006)
Why is it seemingly so difficult to find a human to speak to when having an issue with your bank or mobile phone company? And if you do, why do they sound like robots and/or aren't empowered to make a decision that will solve your problem? More broadly and worryingly, why is it nearly impossible to hold an individual accountable for decisions that led to a major societal or organisational calamity like the Global Financial Crisis, or the UK's Post Office Scandal? Something is going on, and today, we're going to talk about it. My guest is author Dan Davies, and we are talking about his latest book, The Unaccountability Machine - Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions and How the World Lost Its Mind. The book was long-listed for the Financial Times and Schroder's Business Books of the Year. Dan is a former investment banker turned author. His previous book, Lying for Money, was about the 2008 global financial crisis in which no banker went to jail. Dan became interested in why that was the case and to see if the same types of causes for that exist elsewhere. And they do. And it led him to write The Unaccountability Machine. Dan also has a wonderful term called the “accountability sink”, in which a human system delegates decision-making to a rule book rather than an individual, which means that when something goes wrong, no one is to blame. We get into all of that and so much more. Show notes: -The Unaccountability Machine: https://profilebooks.com/work/the-unaccountability-machine/ -Dan's newsletter: https://backofmind.substack.com/ -Dan's author page: https://profilebooks.com/contributor/dan-davies/ -Lying for Money: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38605195-lying-for-money?from_search=true -Dan's previous appearance on the podcast: https://allthingsrisk.libsyn.com/ep-89-dan-davies-lying-for-money -Stafford Beer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Beer -Brian Eno: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Eno -“Designing Freedom”, Stafford Beer's lectures from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNVZ3IuNlXY&list=PLW6YNX5jIRDEvjZz0_icNAaelHXArzfc- -Norbert Wiener: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Wiener -Neural Networks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_network_(machine_learning) -Variety engineering: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variety_(cybernetics) -Good regulator in management cybernetics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_regulator -Ben Recht: https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~brecht/bio.html -Jen Pahlka's Recoding America: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61796680-recoding-america -William Butler Adams / Brompton Bicycles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Butler-Adams _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Learn more about The Decision-Making Studio: https://thedecisionmaking.studio/ All our podcast episodes are here: https://thedecisionmaking.studio/podcast Our latest newsletter: https://us19.campaign-archive.com/?u=f19fc74942b40b513cf66af32&id=1e2a6c0ea9
In this episode we are discussing Cybernetic Revolutionaries by Eden Medina (MIT Press, 2011), which examines the effort to create a cybernetic system of communication and industrial management during the socialist government of Salvador Allende in Chile, from 1970 to 1973. Medina uses this fascinating case study to explore the relationship of two utopian visions: one socialist, and one technological, embodied in figures such as British cybernetics pioneer Stafford Beer and Fernando Flores, a member of Allende's government and advocate of Beer's ideas. Links to references in the episode: La Batalla de Chile Elizabeth Stainforth and Jo Lindsay Walton, 'Computing Utopia: The Horizons of Computational Economies in History and Science Fiction,' Science Fiction Studies, 46:3 (2019) --------------------------------------------------------------- You can keep in touch with the podcast our email abcwithdannyandjim@gmail.com, and Twitter @abcdannyandjim. You can subscribe to our newsletter here: https://abcwithdannyandjim.substack.com/ The podcast music is Stealing Orchestra & Rafael Dionísio, 'Gente da minha terra (que me mete um nojo do caralho).' Reproduced from the Free Music Archive under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (aka Music Sharing) 3.0 International License, available here: https://bit.ly/35ToW4W The podcast logo is an adapted version of the Left Book Club logo (1936-48), reproduced, edited and shared under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International licence. Original available here: https://bit.ly/35Nd6cv. The image in this episode is one of Stafford Beer's schematics for the Cybersyn project, which was displayed in the central operations room in Santiago.
Subscribe, Rate, & Review on YouTube • Spotify • Apple Podcasts✨ About This EpisodeHow can we design virtuous technologies while acknowledging the complexity and unintended consequences of technological innovation?How can we foster curiosity, playfulness, and wonder in a world increasingly dominated by anxiety and technological determinism?This week on Future Fossils (as a teaser for the kind of conversations I am having for my upcoming spin-off Humans On The Loop), I meet with Stockholm-based transdisciplinary technologist, facilitator, complexity researcher, founder of The Psychedelic Society, and once upon a time the youngest-ever board member of Greenpeace UK, Stephen Reid to discuss the importance of taking a more values-driven approach to technology development. Stephen and I agree that it's crucial to consider the potential consequences of technological advancements and to promote a more thoughtful approach to innovation…but for the sake of playing with tension, he places more of an emphasis on our capacity for axiological design whereas I feel more of a need to point out that the rapid evolution of technology can outpace our ability to predict its consequences, troubling efforts to design an enduringly sustainable future. One thing we agree on, and model in this episode, is the value of deeper conversations about the role of technology in society…and how to integrate their transformative potentials.PS — I'm guest lecturing for Stephen's upcoming four-week course on Technological Metamodernism soon, along with Alexander Beiner and Hanzi Freinacht and Ellie Hain and Rufus Pollock. We'll engage critically with ideas like Daniel Schmachtenberger's axiological design and Vitalik Buterin's d/acc. As usual I'm probably the odd duck in this lineup, going hard on epistemic humility and the injunction of digital media to effect a transformation of the modern self-authoring ego into networked, permeable, transjective sub-agencies arising spontaneously and fluidly from fundamentally noncomputable interactions of rapid information flows... Anyway, the point is we'd love to have you join us and sink your teeth into these discussions! I absolutely promise to bring up voting cyborg ecotopes. Big thanks to Stephen for inviting me to play!PPS — Here is another really good, very different conversation between me and Stephen and Alistair Langer on Alistair's show Catalyzing Radical Systems Change.(Editorial Correction: It was Mike Tyson, not Muhammad Ali, who said "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.")✨ Support This Work• Hire me as a consultant or advisor• Become a patron on Substack or Patreon• Help me find backers for Humans On The Loop• Buy the books we discuss from my Bookshop reading list• Buy original paintings and prints or commission new work• Join the conversation in the Holistic Technology & Wise Innovation and Future Fossils Discord servers• Buy the show's music on Bandcamp — intro “Olympus Mons” from the Martian Arts EP & outro “Sonnet A” from the Double-Edged Sword EP• Make one-off donations at @futurefossils on Venmo, $manfredmacx on CashApp, or @michaelgarfield on PayPal✨ Chapters(0:00:00-0:10:29) Stephen's Background and Interests in Technology and Metamodernism (0:10:29-0:18:03) Navigating the Complex Relationship Between Technology and Human Values (0:18:03-0:25:18) The Limits of Axiological Design and the Importance of Community Oversight (0:25:18-0:34:29) Defining and Defending Axiological Design (0:34:29-0:45:03) Exploring Alternative Governance Structures: Guilds and Rites of Passage (0:45:03-0:56:36) Vitalik Buterin's "Defensive Decentralized Accelerationism" (0:56:36-1:06:04) Integrating Humor and Recognizing Irony in the Technosphere(1:06:04-1:12:17) Recovering Awe, Curiosity, and Playfulness in a Tech-Saturated World (1:12:17- 1:12:56) Finding Lightness in the Face of Existential Questions (1:12:56-1:13:28) Exploring The Future and A Call to Action✨ MentionsIain McGilchrist, Daniel Schmachtenberger, Hanzi Freinacht, Josh Schrei, Ken Wilber, Vitalik Buterin, Bayo Akomolafe, Cory Doctorow, Nora Bateson, Dave Snowden, W. Brian Arthur, J. F. Martel, Stafford Beer, Rene Descartes, Bill Plotkin, Joe Edelman, Ellie Hain, Douglas Rushkoff, Robert Kegan, Aldous Huxley, Andrés Gomez Emilsson✨ Select Related Episodes (also available as a Spotify playlist)223 - Timothy Morton, 220 - Austin Wade-Smith219 - Joshua Schrei217 - Gregory Landua and Speaker John Ash214 - Megan Phipps, JF Martel, Phil Ford213 - Amber Case, Michael Zargham212 - Geoffrey West, Manfred Laubichler187 - Kevin Welch, David Hensley178 - Chris Ryan176 - Richard Doyle, Sophie Strand, Sam Gandy174 - Evan Snyder172 - Tyson Yunkaporta166 - Anna Riedl165 - Kevin Kelly163 - Toby Kiers, Brandon Quittem141 - Nora Bateson122 - Magenta Ceiba109 - Bruce Damer094 - Mark Nelson086 - Onyx Ashanti080 - George Dvorsky076 - Technology as Psychedelic Parenting066 - John Danaher060 - Sean Esbjörn-Hargens056 - Sophia Rokhlin051 - Daniel Schmachtenberger050 - Ayana Young042 - William Irwin Thompson017 - Tibet Sprague This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelgarfield.substack.com/subscribe
Economist Dan Davies makes his debut on the pod this week, to talk about his latest book, "The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions - and How The World Lost its Mind". The book examines the social and political conditions of the last years of neoliberal politics, and how technology is used not to improve people's lives meaningfully, but to obscure power. Dan explains his theories on 'accountability sinks' , and how it can be applied to both macroeconomics and internet culture. He then explains how an old theory of cybernetics and information distribution, first posed by the British theorist Stafford Beer, may hold a solution to the accountability crisis – and might be one of the only methods to combat the emerging far right. ----more----Purchase or order a copy of Dan's book, here: https://profilebooks.com/work/the-unaccountability-machine/ Read Dan's substack, here: https://backofmind.substack.com/ -------- PALESTINE AID LINKS As the humanitarian crisis continues to unfold in Gaza, we encourage anyone who can to donate to Medical Aid for Palestinians. You can donate using the links below. Please also donate to the gofundmes of people trying to escape Rafah, or purchase ESIMs. These links are for if you need a well-respected name attached to a fund to feel comfortable sending money. https://www.map.org.uk/donate/donate https://www.savethechildren.org.uk/how-you-can-help/emergencies/gaza-israel-conflict -------- PHOEBE ALERT Can't get enough Phoebe? Check out her Substack Here! -------- This show is supported by Patreon. Sign up for as little as $5 a month to gain access to a new bonus episode every week, and our entire backlog of bonus episodes! Thats https://www.patreon.com/10kpostspodcast -------- Ten Thousand Posts is a show about how everything is posting. It's hosted by Hussein (@HKesvani), Phoebe (@PRHRoy) and produced by Devon (@Devon_onEarth).
“Viable System Model” expert Mark Lambertz joins us on today's podcast to help us unfold organizing in complex ecosystems. Mark, a long-time Agile practitioner and a renowned expert on the Viable System Model has a deep understanding and a curious mindset toward all things organizing. We met Mark as an Organizational Coach at Bosch, where he's driving the adoption of key concepts of the VSM. From his extensive experience, Mark has helped us understand how to use the VSM lens to build autonomous and self-sustaining organizational systems. He takes us through the model's components and practical applications and compares it with other organizational frameworks that we use widely, more specifically, Boundaryless' Rendanheyi-inspired implementation of the Platform Organization with the 3EO Framework. The conversation - where we discover a lot of resonance between the two perspectives - is filled with valuable insights from the ground and helps you move towards a more inclusive model that balances operational efficiency with strategic adaptability. Tune in, and don't miss out. As one of the first attempts to use cybernetics in organizational management, the Viable System Model was conceived by Stafford Beer in his book - “The Brain of the Firm” in the 70s. Mark connects the dots in this podcast and explains why cybernetics is important for building adaptive organizations. The podcast highlights the importance of viewing organizations as adaptive, complex ecosystems emphasizing decentralization, coordination, and collective and emergent strategic planning. He takes us through the depths of VSM, explaining how it starts with an outside-in perspective, focusing on the environment, and then further breaks down the 5 systems within VSM. In this conversation, you get practical insights into incorporating a VSM informed perspective in your organization, helping you stay dynamic and ever-evolving. Key Highlights
Dans cet épisode, nous voyons conséquences - parfois tragique - du coup d'État, notamment sur les Santiago Boys. Stafford Beer, depuis son pays natal, souffre du complexe du survivant. Les autres Santiago Boys, restés au Chili, passent des mois difficiles. On découvrira également l'existence d'un projet parallèle à Cybersyn, qui poursuivait des objectifs inverses. Cybersyn n'était peut-être pas si innovant…
This is the inaugural episode of an on-going mini-series for the Riskgaming podcast we're dubbing the Orthogonal Bet. Organized by our scientist-in-residence Sam Arbesman, the goal is to take a step back from the daily machinations that I, Danny Crichton, generally host on the podcast to look at what Sam describes as “…the interesting, the strange, and the weird. Ideas and topics that ignite our curiosity are worthy of our attention, because they might lead to advances and insights that we can't anticipate.” To that end, today our guest is Matt Webb, a virtuoso tinkerer and creative whose experiments with interaction design and technology have led to such apps as the Galaxy Compass (an app that features an arrow pointing to the center of the universe) and Poem/1, a hardware clock that offers a rhyming poem devised by AI. He's also a regular essayist on his blog Interconnected. We latched onto Matt's recent essay about a vibe shift that's underway in the tech world from the utopian model of progress presented in Star Trek to the absurd whimsy of Douglas Adams and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Along the way, we also discuss Neal Stephenson, the genre known as “design fiction,” Stafford Beer and management cybernetics, the 90s sci-fi show Wild Palms, and how artificial intelligence is adding depth to the already multitalented. Episode Produced by Chris Gates Music by George Ko & Suno
La salle cybernétique, devenue salle des opérations est presque prête mais déjà des doutes se font jour quant au projet Cybersyn. D'autres vont essaimer. Et les ennemis de Stafford Beer est d'Allende vont commencer à essayer de détruire la réputation du projet Cybersyn dans la presse. Stafford Beer peine à parer cette attaque.
Stafford Beer, encouragé par la résolution de la première grande crise par son ami Fernando Flores, va faire un choix fort, celui d'un engagement risqué mais qui doit être total. Il commence à mettre en œuvre son projet Cybersyn mais se heurte à des résistances sur place. Fernando de son côté, a moins le temps de s'intéresser à la Cybernétique. La pression monte autour de Salvador Allende, qui commence à craindre un coup d'État.
Stafford Beer cherche de nouvelles recrues pour son projet cybernétique, entre la Grande Bretagne, le Chili, mais aussi le Brésil. Mais les difficultés d'Allende sont déjà tellement grandes que l'impact possible du projet sur le destin du pays apparaît déjà limité.Un extrait de doublage de Vanilla Bear (celui à 21'27) a été réalisé avec l'aide de l'Intelligence Artificielle (plus précisément le software elevenlabs.io) sur base d'une voix humaine Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
Stafford Beer, la figure principale des Santiago Boys, commence à matérialiser plus concrètement son rêve technologique chilien. L'occasion de découvrir l'ensemble de ses paradoxes, lui le membre de la haute société britannique attiré par la révolution chilienne. Il se heurte à ses premières difficultés, de même que le pays qu'il découvre, à la peine notamment sur le plan économique. L'arme cybernétique d'Allende sera-t-elle prête à temps ? Et les Santiago Boys ont-ils ce qu'il faut pour résister à la pression ?
Après l'élection d'Allende à la tête du Chili, ses adversaires, sous le choc, commencent à s'organiser. Allende bénéficie toutefois encore d'une sorte “d'état de grâce”. Dans ce contexte encore relativement favorable, un personnage unique, qui deviendra central dans l'épopée des Santiago Boys, fait son apparition: Stafford Beer.
Мало кого из тех, кто становится тимлидом, жизнь как-то к этому готовила. Управлению людьми и командами редко учат в университетах, работа рядовым программистом тоже не приносит нужных знаний. Мы решили помочь всем текущим и будущим руководителям и записали выпуск с разбором всех областей знаний, в которых нужно разбираться. Сразу предупреждаю – наш гость, Виталий Шароватов, копает максимально глубоко, поэтому подготовьтесь к обсуждению теории массового обслуживания и психологии рабочего труда! Также ждем вас, ваши лайки, репосты и комменты в мессенджерах и соцсетях! Telegram-чат: https://t.me/podlodka Telegram-канал: https://t.me/podlodkanews Страница в Facebook: www.facebook.com/podlodkacast/ Twitter-аккаунт: https://twitter.com/PodlodkaPodcast Ведущие в выпуске: Евгений Кателла, Катя Петрова, Стас Цыганов, Егор Толстой Полезные ссылки: Практика без теории До Зиммельвейса все врачи практиковали родовспоможение грязными руками https://www.historymed.ru/encyclopedia/doctors/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=4948 Карго-культы в IT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-dvO2sLaZk&list=PLFtS8Ah0wZvWS37oveJ0-D5K6V7GWUpqY&index=28 Физиология труда https://www.ozon.ru/product/psihofiziologiya-professionalnoy-deyatelnosti-umstvennyy-trud-uchebnoe-posobie-studentam-880854493/ http://repo.ssau.ru/bitstream/Uchebnye-izdaniya/Rukovodstvo-po-fiziologii-truda-Elektronnyi-resurs-ucheb-posobie-76477/1/Ведясова%20О.А.%20Руководство.pdf Психология труда https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/81696897.pdf https://urait.ru/book/psihologiya-truda-530652 Организационная психология https://urait.ru/book/organizacionnaya-psihologiya-425235 http://elibrary.sgu.ru/uch_lit/2256.pdf Социология труда https://www.isras.ru/files/File/publ/Toschenko_Zvetkova_soc_truda.pdf Теория систем https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ackoffs-Best-Classic-Writings-Management/dp/0471316342 Научпоп про мотивацию https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0033TI4BW Теория исследования операций https://www.amazon.com/Platform-Change-1st-Stafford-Beer-ebook/dp/B0C3XVYVK6 Кибернетика https://royallib.com/book/viner_norbert/kibernetika_ili_upravlenie_i_svyaz_v_givotnom_i_mashine.html
Ever wondered how the complexity of Language Modeling (LLMs) and cybernetics can revolutionize the way we communicate and interact? Are you curious about the sociopolitical implications of such advancements? Join us in an enlightening discussion with the well-versed Mark Rainey, as we dissect these technologies and their potential impact on our society.Our journey begins with an exploration of LLMs, their potential, and inherent limitations. We discuss the nuanced logic of human language, Boolean operators, and their influence on the design of these systems. We then shift gears to delve into the intriguing world of cybernetics, viable systems, and the behavioralist and cognitivist wars. We scrutinize the implications of these advancements and the tests used to measure intelligence, all the while contemplating the potential and pitfalls of Stafford Beer's Viable System Model. As we navigate further, we probe into the relationship between technology and Marxism, questioning the teleological feedback loop of capital and its effects on the proletariat. We also explore the exciting realm of cybernetic planning and the potential role of LLMs in such systems. Finally, we reflect on the concepts of agency, alienation, class dynamics, and the implications of capitalism on social reproduction. This rich and riveting conversation with Mark Rainey is not to be missed! Support the showCrew:Host: C. Derick VarnAudio Producer: Paul Channel Strip ( @aufhebenkultur )Intro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesArt Design: Corn and C. Derick VarnLinks and Social Media:twitter: @skepoetYou can find the additional streams on Youtube
Want a cool cucumber salad? Joël's got you covered. Stephanie has evolved and found some pickles she enjoys. Experienced programmers use a lot of heuristics or "rules of thumb" about what makes their code better. These aren't always true, but they work in most situations. Stephanie and Joël discuss a range of heuristics, how to use them, how to come up with them, how to know when to break them, and how to teach them to more junior devs. Pickled mustard seeds (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLMFGk7Ylw0) The purpose of a system is what it does (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does) Intro to empirical software engineering by Hillel Wayne (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WELBnE33dpY) Transcript: STEPHANIE: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Stephanie Minn. JOËL: And I'm Joël Quenneville. And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. STEPHANIE: So, Joël, what's new in your world? JOËL: So, as of the recording of this, summer is in full swing, and it's the time of year where we have all these, you know, fresh vegetables out, so I've been really enjoying a lot of those. I think this week; in particular, I've been going into, like, all the variations on cucumber salads. STEPHANIE: Ooh. JOËL: Yeah. So, that's been kind of fun for me. A fun thing I've been doing to spice this up is pickling mustard seeds to add as a topping. That's actually really amazing. It adds just a little bit of acidity, a little bit of crunch, a little bit of texture. And it's pretty. STEPHANIE: That sounds so delicious. And also, I was going to share something about pickles about what's new in my world. [laughs] But first, I am curious, what has been your go-to cucumber salad that you put this pickled mustard seed situation on top? JOËL: So, cucumbers and tomatoes is just the base of everything. And then, it kind of goes with random things I have in my fridge. A little bit of goat cheese on top can be a great topping, big fan of balsamic glaze. You can just get, like, a bottle of that at the grocery store, the pickled mustard seeds. I've recently been trying topping with a fried egg. STEPHANIE: Ooh, that sounds really fun. It kind of, like, adds a bit of savoriness and creaminess and maybe even, like, the crunchy fried edges. That sounds really yummy. JOËL: Particularly if you do it over easy where the center is not fully cooked. When the egg breaks, you effectively get salad dressing for free. STEPHANIE: That sounds so delicious. JOËL: Summer vegetables, they're great. STEPHANIE: They are great. Last year, I did have a cucumber garden, as in a garden, and a few cucumber plants that were too prolific for me, to be honest. I found myself overrun with cucumbers and having to give them away because we just didn't eat them enough. And this year, we scaled back a little bit [laughs] on the cucs. But I am so excited to bring up what's new in my world now because it's, like, so related, and we did not plan this at all. But I have a silly little thing to share about my own pickle journey. So, I used to be a pickle hater. JOËL: You know what? Same. STEPHANIE: Oh my gosh, incredible. Another new thing we've learned about each other. I really, like, wanted to like pickles because, you know, when you order a sandwich in a restaurant, it always comes with the pickle spear. And neither me nor my partner were into pickles, and we would always leave the spear uneaten on the plate, and we felt so bad about it. I felt really bad about it. And so, every, like, three to six months or so, I'd be like, okay, I'm going to gather the courage to try the pickle again and see if maybe my taste buds have changed, and this time I'll like it. And, you know, I would try a bite and just be like, no, no, I don't think it's for me. [laughs] But I guess I was just so primed to do something about, like, wanting to eliminate this really inconsequential food waste. But every time it happened, I would just, you know, [laughs] be, like, oh, if only I loved pickles. And I got my friend, who is a pickle connoisseur, to help me figure out, like, what pickles I might like. So, I asked her to come up with, like, a pickle sampler for me because I really hadn't tried all too many. And that actually really helped me find which ones were a little more palatable to me. So, I found out that I liked the sweeter ones. There's, like, a bread and butter pickle that can be quite sweet. Your diner pickle can be very different from a jar of, like, fancy pickles. [laughs] JOËL: Definitely. STEPHANIE: One day, she gifted me a jar of, like, Polish gherkins that were delicious. JOËL: Hmmm. STEPHANIE: I was like, wow, I can just snack on these. So, the thing that's new is that this time, I went to an Eastern European grocery store, and I bought my own jar of pickled gherkins. And that was something that Stephanie, like, two years ago, would never even do. [laughs] JOËL: That's really cool that you got a chance to sort of explore a broader range of what was available in the pickle world and then were able to find kind of your niche there and discover something new that you actually like. STEPHANIE: Yeah, it was very fun. And now I feel like my whole world has opened up to, you know, pickley and fermented things and just, like, get to enjoy even more snacks. So, to move away from pickles, recently, on my client project, I've been pairing a lot more with other client developers. And one thing that has come up is, you know, talking about our reasoning or our thought process for when we're pairing on some code. And I realized that I have built up a lot of either intuition or maybe some rules that I like to follow when I'm writing code, writing a test, or even doing a code review. And I've realized that you know, as developers, we often use these kinds of shortcuts or heuristics to help orient us as we're doing our work. JOËL: Yeah. I think that's definitely something that either comes yourself from experience or sometimes is passed along, and you get to benefit from somebody else's experience. They learned the hard way a lot of these tips and tricks, and now they kind of pass on some of these guidelines to us. Do you have any favorites that you reach for frequently? STEPHANIE: So, one way I like to approach a problem is to start messy [laughs] and to kind of see what that gets me and then where to go from there. I find that it's a little bit easier for me to draw on things that I've, you know, learned or picked up and tips once I have something in front of me to react to. So, maybe I will just go with the naive implementation and just write all of the code in one method, you know, in a class. And from there, now that it's out of my system, can I kind of come back in with a finer tooth comb and then apply more of a sustained effort to clean things up, right? And, to me, the question I find myself asking is, like, can this be extracted further? And so, you know, if I have everything in one giant method, then yes, [laughs] there is likely, you know, many opportunities to extract that, and maybe I will see something like, oh, the way that I spaced out this code that might be a signal to me that, like, these are some ideas that are grouped together, and I can pull something out there. JOËL: Do you have a heuristic around when to stop extracting? STEPHANIE: That's a good point. I think I tend to stop when I have kind of pulled out the classes that make sense to me. And, at that point, you know, like, maybe there is more extraction that can be done. But at a certain point, you know, you then get these really tiny classes that maybe don't hold their weight. And I think that's also true of methods that then call other methods, and that's the only thing that they do. Then it's like, well, is this too extracted that it's not really giving a future reader helpful information, right? I want the extraction to improve readability. And that tends to be another lens through which I am applying to this idea of, like, can I extract further? Is this extraction helpful for understanding this code? JOËL: I like the idea of looking at the code through multiple lenses. And so, sometimes you look at it through the lens of, yeah, are there enough moving parts here? Or does it feel kind of brittle and all in one place? And then sometimes completely shifting your lens and saying, you know what? Let's put myself in the seat of someone who's looking at this code for the first time. Can I understand it? So, structuring and extracting code is a big part of the work that we do. And I also happen to have a couple of heuristics that I like to use. One is separate branching code from doing code. So, if I have an if...else condition, I try not to put ten lines of logic inside each branch; instead, I have just a call out to a method so that the only thing the conditional does is to choose which path you go, and then each individual path is its own method. Similarly, if I'm writing a method, I'm not going to have a bunch of logic then a conditional mixed in together. So, my heuristic is a method gets to do one of two things. It either gets to choose a path to take or it gets to do a thing, but you can't mix and match both. STEPHANIE: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I really appreciate a well-named method that is, you know, determining, like, what condition needs to happen because then that helps me, yeah, like, avoid having to hold all of this information about this condition or this other condition, and this other condition in order to figure out what path I'm trying to take. JOËL: And the naming and the readability, I think, is a big part of this. Another heuristic that I like to use that kind of converges on the same result is trying to write each method at a single level of abstraction. So, if I am writing a method that has some kind of high-level terms it's using, I'm not going to also mix in a lot of low-level implementation. And then, similarly, if it's a method that's doing a lot of, like, low-level nuts and bolts things, I'm going to try not to pull in some of these higher-level domain name methods in there. And so, by separating things out so that every method reads one level of abstraction, you make it much easier for the reader to go through and figure out what's happening. Are we kind of getting that more 10,000-foot view, getting a sense of what's happening, and saying, okay, we want to process the user form, and then we want to send off an email, and then we want to, you know, write to a file? Or are we going through, okay, we're going to increment a counter so that we get exponential back off on our [inaudible 10:28] request? Those two things do not belong together in the same method. STEPHANIE: Yeah, absolutely. I really like this heuristic. And I have been applying it more and more and found it really useful for making sure that you're handling your errors correctly, especially because, at different levels of abstraction, you want to do different things with your errors, right? An implementation error that's raised because, you know, you're calling something accidentally on nil, or maybe a third-party service is down, and you get a custom error, whatever that is, those concerns are different from how you want to handle things at the controller level. And oftentimes, I see those things really mixed together, and honestly, I think leads to a lot of buggy code when you're trying to handle things that can go wrong at the wrong level of abstraction. JOËL: Yeah. Is there a good heuristic around what level you think is best to trigger an exception? Or maybe, more generally, just being aware of different levels of abstraction and knowing that catching or triggering errors at each level will have different impacts. STEPHANIE: I think more of the latter, the having an awareness of what kinds of errors might be possible and what impact that has on the user, right? The user being either an actual customer or, you know, another developer who has to read a notification from an error monitoring service. [laughs] JOËL: This is really interesting to me because I think we've now bridged the concept of heuristics into the idea of mental models. So, the heuristic is write your methods at a single level of abstraction, but that then leads into a mental model where maybe code is structured in three or four different layers. You've got a low level, a mid-level, a high level, something like that, of abstraction. And now, you can use that mental model to start thinking about what are the impacts of exceptions at each layer? And then, maybe you complete the circle by creating a heuristic that relies on that mental model, maybe, I don't know, raise in the low-level rescue at the top level or something. I'm making something absolutely arbitrary up right now. But somehow, we've gone from heuristic, which creates a mental model, which then allows us to build new heuristics on top of that, and that seems like a virtuous cycle to me. STEPHANIE: Yeah, absolutely. I think what I'm also picking up is the idea that you do need a mental model, or you do need to draw on your own ideas about something in order to apply the heuristic, right? You know, someone could tell you to separate branching code from doing code. But maybe you don't know what that means or, like, maybe you don't see why that's important. And sure, you can still apply it and try your best to follow it. But, in some ways, I think that the best heuristics are ones that you've kind of developed for yourself based on your own experience. JOËL: That's really interesting. I think once you've built from your own experience, I definitely feel like they're really impactful because you've kind of synthesized 2, 5, 10, 20 years of experience doing some of this work into, oftentimes, like, you know, a pithy one-line sentence, 5, 6 words that convey an approach that you've found works best, you know, maybe 80% or 90% of the time. The power of synthesis for your own self-learning I think it's really hard to understate. So, I'm curious if there's any other heuristics that you commonly use that you kind of created yourself based off your own experience rather than just having it be more of a broadly received idea from the community. STEPHANIE: I think, for me, it's more so that the experience has helped affirm certain heuristics and also made me feel more comfortable with letting others go. And one that I heard a lot but, like, didn't quite understand until really working through it deeper is the idea of feeling pain when you write a test, and that being a signal of opportunities to try different design with your code. And I just didn't know what that pain was at the beginning. Like, what does that even mean? [laughs] Like, how can a test cause me pain? But on my own, I realized, oh, like, actually, I get really frustrated when I need to stub out a whole method chain, right? And I find myself having to go look up how to do that or just spending a lot of time having to do something that I haven't done before. Maybe the pain comes from having to change a lot of files because, oh no, like, I also broke 20 other tests in the process. But when you're first starting out, oftentimes, you, like, don't know that that is not normal [laughs]; at least, that was true for me. And so, that was something that I had heard about, like, if you are feeling pain when writing a test, then, like, maybe reconsider your code design. But when you don't know how to identify what that pain is, and you also, like, don't know where to go from there, I find that, you know, the heuristic can only help you so much. JOËL: Yeah. Maybe that's something that's challenging with a heuristic in that they're often expressed as these pithy sentences. But if you're not familiar with some of the underlying concepts, that might make them harder to apply, which is unfortunate because, oftentimes, these heuristics that we've developed as a community are targeted to newcomers to help them kind of avoid the mistakes that we've made along the way. STEPHANIE: I think what really helped me the most in connecting a heuristic that's commonly expressed and my own experience is when I've had someone ask me about how I'm feeling when I'm, you know, making some kind of decision or when I'm reading some code. Like, what do I think of this, or what has been my experience with this? And giving me the opportunity on the spot to synthesize that information. Because otherwise, it's hard to figure out, you know, like, what is just normal? This is just life as a developer [laughs]. And what are opportunities to maybe gain some more insight about the work itself? JOËL: One thing that I've learned over time as a developer, and I'm not sure if this quite rises to the level of a heuristic, but a lot of, like, pain and frustration in development doesn't necessarily have to be that way. And it's not necessarily because I'm bad at the job or I'm too new to the technology or whatever. It can often be a sign of underlying design issues or the fact that the system was modeled with certain assumptions that are no longer true. These can often be signals that you can make things better. So, I think if I had to reduce this idea down to a clever one-liner, it'd be something along the lines of, it can be better, or it doesn't have to be this bad. You're writing a test, and it's really annoying. There might be a better way to structure the underlying code that would make the test better. You're having to do some, like, really clunky code to deal with something. Is there maybe a better object design that would make a lot of that pain go away, or at least kind of quarantine it in a certain part of the codebase? STEPHANIE: I actually think you're really onto something because what I was just hearing, I love that, like, it can be better. It's less prescribed, I guess, than some other heuristics, like, you know, do not repeat yourself, or whatever. JOËL: Classic. STEPHANIE: [laughs] It really encourages, like, the individual to think a little deeper. And it actually reminded me of another...this is actually a bit of a pithy saying, but I find it to be really useful. And I'm curious if you've heard it before. It's a systems thinking heuristic, and the phrase is, the purpose of a system is what it does. JOËL: Ooh, I have heard that, and I'm trying to remember what context. STEPHANIE: So, it was coined by a systems thinking expert. Stafford Beer, I think, is his name. And I recently learned about it from a friend. But I think the cool thing is that it can be applied to literally anything [laughs] because everything is a system, you know, or not just software. But I have found a lot of value in applying it to just, like, is this function doing what it says it does, right? Or is it actually also doing, like, a side effect? And turns out, maybe we want to bring that into alignment with what the name of the function is, or try pulling that out, or whatever. I think it can also be true of test suites. I don't know if this is a heuristic or not. But the idea that we should always be testing or all tests are good, yeah, I guess that could pass as a heuristic. By bringing this perspective of the purpose of a system is what it does, it's like, well, is the test suite also so bloated and takes so long and so flaky that it is actually hindering development? And if that is the case, then maybe there is some reevaluation necessary, right? Rather than just claiming that it's helping us have more confidence in our code when that may or may not be true. JOËL: You brought up an interesting idea here, which is that heuristics aren't always right. So, you're talking about the idea that a heuristic like good code is tested code might not be correct in 100% of the cases. Like, how accurate does a heuristic need to be in order for it to be really valuable? You know, you're hoping for something that's, like, 90% correct that you can follow most of the time, except in some edge cases, or something maybe as low as, like, 50% where it's a coin toss whether the heuristic applies in the situation or not. Are those still useful? Or are they maybe more confusing than otherwise? STEPHANIE: Oh wow. That's a really interesting way to frame it because I don't know if I've ever stored information about how well my heuristics are serving me. [laughs] But I do really like the idea that you can use a heuristic as a guiding principle just to try and that you can always back out of it, right? So, if you're wanting to take DRY to the extremist of extremes, just for fun or just to see how that might go, you can go down that path and, at any point, decide, okay, like, I like this, or I don't like this, and choose a different path. But the idea of kind of tracking, like, how well they're working for you that is really interesting to me, and not something I've tried before. JOËL: I love the idea of taking a heuristic and, like, doing a side project whose whole goal is just to kind of push that heuristic to the extreme, to the breaking point so that, that way, you get an intuition of, like, when does it work for you? When does it not? That sounds like a really fun exercise for someone to do. Is that something that you've done yourself? STEPHANIE: Not to the point of a whole side project, but just like I like to try pickles randomly every now and then to see if I like them, [laughs] will just try a new technique and see how it goes. In an episode a while back, we talked about whether we TDD or not, and, to be honest, I don't do it, you know, 100% of the time or all the time. But one day, I did decide to TDD a full-stack feature from start to finish just for fun [laughs], and I enjoyed it. I learned some things about it. And I think now I've kind of integrated the parts that I liked about it into my development flow. Like, I'm not always going to do it. But I think it also just helped me figure out, like, okay, like, what is this thing about that people claim that is the pinnacle of how we should be writing our code? And how can I decide for myself, like, whether it works for me or just pick and choose the parts of it that work for me? JOËL: Yeah. That just seems like a really valuable exercise. There are definitely too many heuristics out there to do that for everything. But I guess I've never thought of it quite so concretely. But I almost wonder if I should, like, add this to my kind of personal growth plan to say, like, once a year, I'm going to take a heuristic and kind of push it to an extreme and see what I can learn about it. STEPHANIE: I actually think what's really cool is the process of, like, any individual developer figuring out what kinds of heuristics they want to follow, as opposed to, you know, like, a mass proclamation that, like, this is the way, right? Are there any heuristics that you have maybe picked up and then let go of because you realized that, you know, they weren't working enough or frequently enough for you or that you just didn't like? JOËL: I don't know about, like, fully letting go, but definitely kind of recontextualize and sometimes even sort of rewrote them a little bit to work for me. So, a classic one would be the idea that shorter code is more readable. So, it's common to see comments on a pull request sort of like, "Hey, you could make this shorter by doing this." And that can be true to a certain extent. When you get to the point where you're playing code golf, it becomes absolutely unreadable. But also, there's a point where sometimes using some other heuristics will result in longer code but actually make it more readable on the whole. And so, packing everything into one method might be overall shorter, so it's fewer lines to read going through a class. But maybe extracting some methods or doing that separating branching code from doing code might lead to an overall longer class but an also overall more readable one. So, I think there's probably a lot of caveats that go with that idea. Oftentimes, shorter can be more readable with, you know, two or three asterisks that maybe go a little bit more into the why that is the case. STEPHANIE: Yeah. I like the contextualizing. That actually reminded me of a talk that I watched recently by Hillel Wayne. It's called Intro to Empirical Software Engineering. And he basically, like, does a deep dive into all these studies about software practices that we think are, quote, unquote, "good," like, as a community or as an industry. And it's like, well, like, how do we actually know? Like, show me the research, right? And one of the studies that he included was trying to determine if using abbreviations for variable names or using the full words made the code easier to debug or not. And so, the main example that he was using was employee number as a variable, and the abbreviation was EMP num. And it turns out that there was no difference in how easy it was to debug. But the approach that each group that was studied differed. So, the folks who had the full names, the full words for the variable names, were kind of using an approach of just scanning the code and being able to understand at a higher level the domain, right? Whereas the folks who were debugging with just abbreviations had to work at a bit of a lower level and, you know, or maybe using breakpoints and debugging the code that way. And I thought that was really cool because, first of all, I think it kind of was trying to prove that, like, we don't actually know if one is better or not. But what is important and interesting to me is the idea that, like, you can choose the method that you like better or that works for you and the human side of it, right? The impact it has on our process. JOËL: That's really cool. I'll have to go and watch that talk. Building this kind of context and nuance around a heuristic, though, takes a lot of time, takes experience. And part of the value of a heuristic is that we're collapsing down maybe our own experience or somebody else's experience into something that doesn't require you to necessarily do all that work upfront. How do you feel about sharing and kind of targeting a lot of these heuristics to newer coders who are kind of trying to get better at their craft and looking for ways to improve without necessarily having to do, you know, five years of experience digging into a particular topic? Do you think heuristics are helpful, or do they maybe mislead? STEPHANIE: I really value when they're presented as an opinion, as opposed to a true fact about code. [laughs] Because I really appreciate when someone is able to explain to me why they chose readability in this particular scenario or why they chose speed and performance. Or maybe they were making a trade-off between accessibility and, you know, something else. To just, like, tell someone, "Oh yeah, like, DRY code is better code," or to just tell someone that without the explanation with, like, offering them the opportunity to reflect themselves on, like, oh, like, where have I seen DRY code that was easier for me to read? That seems a little less helpful in terms of investing in their growth. JOËL: Yeah. Definitely, I think sharing some of the purpose behind it can often be really useful because most of these heuristics are never an end unto themselves. They're a means to some other end. So, you're not writing code that's DRY just because you want to be cool. You're writing code to be DRY because you're trying to improve readability, make it easier to change so you don't have to change it in multiple places. You want to maybe reduce the chance of certain types of bugs. These are all actual purposes of what you want to do in your code. DRY is just one way of getting there. But oftentimes, we might skip that part and just be like, hey, you should make your code DRY because DRY is the best. And it can be, but it's in service to these other goals. STEPHANIE: I think when I am sharing those types of heuristics that are more commonly held, I also do like to preface, like, some people think this, or some people like to do things this way, just to be clear that they don't have to like it or do it. In general, I always prefer injecting more nuance [laughs] into the conversation. But yeah, like, it is a really personal process, I think, and figuring out, like, how any individual makes decisions about, like, all the code they're writing. You have to make a million [laughs] decisions every time you do it. So, yes, like, those heuristics do provide a shortcut. And also, I think it's worth taking the time to think about if it's working, especially for the specific context that you're applying it, right? Because that also can change. And, I don't know, maybe I'm just skeptical of any one size fits all solution. JOËL: I think for myself, with many heuristics, as a beginner coder, I had a bit of, like, a spiral journey, or maybe kind of going up a set of stairs. So, as a brand-new developer, I would make a lot of duplication bugs in my code, where, you know, I would have the same value in multiple places, and then I'd change it in one place, and I don't remember to change it in other places, and the code breaks. And so, being introduced to the idea of DRY actually helped my code get quite a bit better. It was, like, a net positive on my experience because I was not getting burned by all these bugs quite so frequently. And so, for a while, just throwing more DRY into my code just made my life better. And then, eventually, you kind of hit that plateau where I don't run into the pain of these bugs anymore. But now I keep doing more DRY somewhat mindlessly. And I end up with this pile of abstractions that are actually really brittle or frustrating to work with. And now, I have to rethink some of the assumptions behind the heuristic. And then, at that point, yep, maybe recontextualize a little bit, learn about when it's good, when are the trade-offs not worth it. Now I have a better understanding, and I kind of go on another growth bit where it makes a lot of my code better until maybe I hit another plateau. I've kind of maxed out the benefits. I start seeing some of the pain, and then, again, I have to go through this cycle again. And maybe the approach you were talking about earlier, where you do a side project and kind of push a heuristic to its breaking point, is a way to kind of speed run that process. STEPHANIE: Yeah, that's really interesting because you're just committing to it and trying to learn everything you can from it in a very concentrated setting. I also wonder, and it's totally fine if you don't know, but if someone had told you kind of all of those reasons you listed about why DRY code, like, what that achieves, if that may have reframed how you were thinking about applying it. Or was that also something that had to come from doing it enough? JOËL: I think as a brand-new developer, a lot of that would have gone over my head. I was still really shaky on the concept of abstraction. When is it useful? When is it not? So, a lot of those more subtle pitfalls, I think, would not have been relevant to me at that point in my career, even the concept of readability, right? When I'm a brand-new programmer, I'm still getting used to reading a lot of code. And so, the idea that code might be written in a way that's unreadable or more challenging to read, it might just feel like, oh, I just need to get better, improve myself. It's not that the code is written in a hard-to-read way. It's just I don't have enough experience at reading code. And I think that's a common thing that we do as beginners at everything, right? We start by blaming ourselves when things get hard. STEPHANIE: Yeah. I was just thinking that, you know, if you are sharing heuristics with a newer developer or an early-career developer, at the end of the day, like, really, I'm not sure about the value of just dropping it on them and letting them run [laughs] with it. But I think what could be really, really effective is just having a sustained relationship with them and, like, continuing that conversation. It's, like, maybe in a code review or in a pairing session being like, "Oh yeah, like, I see you're practicing DRY. Like, what do you think about how this made this piece of code different?" And kind of baking in that process of self-discovery along the way and speeding it up in that way as well. JOËL: So, what you're really saying is the one heuristic to rule them all is code in community. STEPHANIE: I love that. I'm totally with you. JOËL: On that note, shall we wrap up? STEPHANIE: Let's wrap up. Show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. JOËL: This show has been produced and edited by Mandy Moore. STEPHANIE: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes. It really helps other folks find the show. JOËL: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us @_bikeshed, or you can reach me @joelquen on Twitter. STEPHANIE: Or reach both of us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. JOËL: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeee!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com.
We are excited to be joined again by Evgeny Morozov, host of The Santiago Boys, a new narrative podcast series about the history of Cybersyn, the geopolitics of its creation in Cold War Latin America, and the legacy of Salvador Allende, Fernando Flores, and the man who looms largest of all: Stafford Beer. This podcast series is not like any story of Cybersyn you might have read before. Morozov has take a mountain of research — over 200 hundred original interviews, deep archival investigations, all compiled into an online resource accessible via the link below — and turned it into a thrilling narrative about a radical system that almost was, a world that could have been, and the people who fought to the end for those dreams. ••• The Santiago Boys: https://the-santiago-boys.com ••• Outro song: Fela Kuti - International Thief Thief (I.T.T.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jptR_YwCs3o Subscribe to hear more analysis and commentary in our premium episodes every week! https://www.patreon.com/thismachinekills Hosted by Jathan Sadowski (www.twitter.com/jathansadowski) and Edward Ongweso Jr. (www.twitter.com/bigblackjacobin). Production / Music by Jereme Brown (www.twitter.com/braunestahl)
Stafford Beer suddenly faces stinging accusations from radical British leftists. Is he engineering a cybernetic Big Brother? Meanwhile, Allende battles a political whirlwind, abandoned by the Kremlin and unable to fully overcome Washington's invisible blockade. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The day of reckoning arrives with a rain of missiles on La Moneda, spelling a tragic end for Allende's revolution. With Fernando arrested and others in exile, Cybersyn's future hangs in balance. A world away, a distraught Stafford Beer races against time to aid his imperiled Chilean comrades. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
With wealthy tycoons and far-right militants lurking in the shadows, poised to strike, Allende charges at a towering tech giant. The Santiago Boys welcome Stafford Beer to Chile, inaugurating a daring cybernetic revolution. Could their audacious plan toss Allende a lifeline? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
If you're not a patron you can get the full episode by visiting patreon.com/workstoppage and support us with $5 a month. For our eighth and final episode (for now) in our series on the basics of Cybernetics and how it relates to the labor movement, we finally explore the details of Stafford Beer's Viable Systems Model (VSM). John walks us through the various subsystems of Beer's model for analyzing organizations, and we discuss examples of how the model would apply to an individual human being, a labor union, and even an entire nation. We discuss the various key features of organization this form of analysis reveals, like the importance of devolving at least some management functions to the lowest level parts of the system, or in the case of a union, democratically empowering each and every member. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
If you're not a patron you can get the full episode by visiting patreon.com/workstoppage and support us with $5 a month. We're back in the world of Cybernetics for this week's Patron episode. On Part 7 of our series, John explains the admittedly very complex concepts of Autopoiesis and Eudemony, key ideas for understanding Stafford Beer's "Viable Systems Model" which stands are the core of his thought. Breaking down these concepts of how systems like machines and biological organisms reproduce themselves and how structures organize themselves towards a maximal goal also help show the parallels between Cybernetics and the study of human societies, history, and more broadly how human beings organize themselves. On our next episode, we will go into the VSM in detail and explain how Beer used it as the foundation for setting up Project Cybersyn and embarking on an attempt to radically democratize the Chilean economy. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
In this episode, the overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973 is discussed, along with the consequential destruction of Stafford Beer's Project Cybersyn. Other issues examined are the nature of scarcity, poverty, empire and social neuroses. Transcript: https://www.revolutionnow.live Support Peter's efforts through Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/peterjoseph Join his mailing list: https://www.peterjoseph.info/ Get Peter's book, The New Human Rights Movement: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/691520/the-new-human-rights-movement-by-peter-joseph/ This podcast is also available on Apple, Spotify, Podbean, Google Podcasts. Website & Free Archive https://www.revolutionnow.live/ Substack: https://substack.com/@peterjoseph Join Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/RevolutionNowPodcast/ About Peter: https://www.peterjoseph.info/biography Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/peterjosephofficial Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/peterjosephofficial/
Often, risk and reward collide. Corporate giants and high-stakes gamblers unknowingly walk parallel paths. Their worlds may seem separate to outsiders, although fate has a way of intertwining their destinies. Both are driven by ambition, chasing triumph. But as their desires for success grow, a hidden truth begins to reveal itself. LLMs, like the roll of Snake Eyes in a dice game, hold the power to shape kismet and shatter dreams. The line between success and ruin is as fragile as the edge of a dice. As corporate entities collide with the ultimate risktakers, a new game emerges.Allen Woods served as a soldier in the British Army, primarily with Infantry battalions. Afterwards, he made a pivotal decision to enter into the world of computing. He devoted himself to studies, and eventually reached the esteemed level of a degree . He is a Charter member of the British Computer Society, and has extensive experience in building information management frameworks. He stops by BarCode to share his incredible journey of transformation, risk, and lifelong pursuit of knowledge. We focus on software development, Cybernetics, LLMs and fragility within data relationships.TIMESTAMPS:0:06:12 - Military IT Career and Knowledge Sharing0:12:43 - The Value of Connecting Databases0:17:45 - Incorporating Cybernetics in Software Development0:21:02 - Technological Economy's Low Equilibrium State0:27:01 - Importance of Due Diligence0:32:03 - Exploiting Relationships in Network Science0:38:59 - The UK Post Office's Horizon System0:42:47 - Limits of Probability Testing in AI0:48:28 - LLMs in Small BusinessesSYMLINKSLinkedInBritish Computer SocietyLudwig von Bertalanffy's “General Systemology”"Autopoiesis and Congition: The Realization of the Living" by Humberto Maturana"Brain of the Firm" by Stafford Beer "The Heart of Enterprise" by Stafford Beer"Living Systems" by James Greer Miller Stephen Wolfram WritingsCommon Crawl DatasetProject GutenbergNetwork Science by BarabásiUK Post Office Horizon Case"The Age of Surveillance Capitalism" by Shoshana ZuboffDRINK INSTRUCTIONTHE LAST MECHANICAL ART3/4 Oz Mezcal3/4 Oz Cynar3/4 Oz Sweet Vermouth3/4 Oz CampariStir all ingredients in an ice-filled mixing glass and strain into a chilled coupe. Optionally garnish with an Orange twist.INTERVIEWERSChris GlandenRohan LightMike ElkinsEPISODE SPONSORTUXCARECONNECT WITH USBecome a SponsorSupport us on PatreonFollow us on LinkedInTweet us at @BarCodeSecurityEmail us at info@barcodesecurity.com
If you're not a patron you can get the full episode by visiting patreon.com/workstoppage and support us with $5 a month. Our series on Cybernetics and Labor continues this week as we dive into the beginning of Project Cybersyn and Stafford Beer's arrival in Chile. We discuss Beer's invitation from the government of Salvador Allende, his work with prominent government officials, and the incredible speed with which his project was assembled. We also begin breaking down Beer's concept of the Viable Systems Model as applied to a socialist government. In our next episode, we will discuss the planned deployment and testing of the project in the final months of Allende's time in power before the CIA-backed coup brought everything crashing to a halt. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
If you're not a patron you can get the full episode by visiting patreon.com/workstoppage and support us with $5 a month. We're back from our week off for Lina's wedding and in the latest episode of our series on the history of Cybernetics and its relationship to labor, we've finally arrived at the work of Stafford Beer. Beer's work on complex systems revolutionized the way management operations are thought of in both the business world and in all systems of planning. His book Brain of the Firm on how to better manage complex systems like factories or even networks of them was so influential, he was invited to assist the government of Chile under the leadership of recently elected socialist Salvador Allende. Beer's work on the project of creating an automated command center for monitoring and adjusting the economy of Chile, known as Cybersyn, has become legendary for its futuristic approach to running a planned society. In this episode we discuss an overview of Beer's life and works, and in the next few episodes we will dive into the details of his thought, how Cybersyn was meant to work, and how Beer's body of work can be used by the labor movement and socialists around the world today. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
This week was a exciting but busy one with all of us getting together to celebrate Lina's wedding, which unfortunately made it impossible to put together the regular episode. So we've decided to unlock the first episode in our new series on the history of the field of cybernetics and how the labor movement has interacted with it. It's been a super fascinating topic learning about figures like Norbert Wiener, Ross Ashby, and Stafford Beer, so we hope you like this unlocked episode as just the first portion of what we've been covering. Our Cybernetics series will continue for patrons later this week and our weekly labor news rundown will be back at our regularly scheduled time next Tuesday! Thank you so much for listening, we couldn't do the show without you! Original Description: We're very excited this week to be starting our long awaited series discussing the history of the field of cybernetics and how it intersects with the labor movement. In this first part, John explains the life and work of polymath and founder of the study of cybernetics, Norbert Wiener. We discuss the parallels between Wiener's thinking and Marxism, the ways that his conception of cybernetics requires a dialectical outlook at the world, and how the systems theory approach of cybernetics can help us understand complex events, including in the realm of politics and organizing. Next week, we will continue with the second half of our discussions on Norbert Wiener, including his relationship with the UAW. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
Adam is joined by Dr James Fox to discuss the legacy of cybernetics and organizational theory, its Leftist critics, and the potential for a cybernetics of the commune, one which politicizes the dynamic systems of democracy at play in worker organizing. We discussed public attitudes to cyber-theory, the history of the field from Wiener to Bogdanov and Stafford Beer, and the use of machinic language from Deleuze to the CCRU.You can read all of the pieces from James we discussed today over at https://tektology.substack.com/Also: Catch James' talk on his work for the COVER centre at the University of Essex https://youtu.be/BO2LszSj9o8 Support the podcast:Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcastZer0 Books and Repeater Media Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/zer0repeaterMerch: http://www.crit-drip.comOrder 'The Philosopher's Tarot': https://repeaterbooks.com/product/the-philosophers-tarot/Subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts: https://tinyurl.com/169wvvhiHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.comRevolting Bodies (Will's Blog): https://revoltingbodies.comSplit Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/Support the show
Adam is joined by Dr James Fox to discuss the legacy of cybernetics and organizational theory, its Leftist critics, and the potential for a cybernetics of the commune, one which politicizes the dynamic systems of democracy at play in worker organizing. We discussed public attitudes to cyber-theory, the history of the field from Wiener to Bogdanov and Stafford Beer, and the use of machinic language from Deleuze to the CCRU.You can read all of the pieces from James we discussed today over at https://tektology.substack.com/Also: Catch James' talk on his work for the COVER centre at the University of Essex https://youtu.be/BO2LszSj9o8 Support Zer0 Books and Repeater Media on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/zerobooksSubscribe: http://bit.ly/SubZeroBooksFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ZeroBooks/Twitter: https://twitter.com/zer0books-----Other links:Check out the projects of some of the new contributors to Zer0 Books:Acid HorizonPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcastYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/acidhorizonMerch: crit-drip.comThe Philosopher's Tarot from Repeater Books: https://repeaterbooks.com/product/the-philosophers-tarot/The Horror VanguardApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/horror-vanguard/id1445594437Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/horrorvanguardBuddies Without OrgansApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/buddies-without-organs/id1543289939Website: https://buddieswithout.org/Xenogothic: https://xenogothic.com/
If you're not a patron you can get the full episode by visiting patreon.com/workstoppage and support us with $5 a month. On the fourth episode of our series on the history of the discipline of Cybernetics and its relationship to the labor movement, we continue our discussions on the work of W Ross Ashby with his creation of the first fully self regulating machine, the Homeostat. This machine and its systems for returning itself to equilibrium provide a theoretical analogy for looking at how organizations like a labor union respond to changes to their environment. Ashby's development of the concept of variety and the regulation of systems provides a different way of examining the problems of bureaucracy, ossification, and the incredible potential in realizing true democracy. In our next episodes, we will be moving to the work of Stafford Beer and the development of Management Cybernetics and the direct relationship between Cybernetics and Socialism. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
If you're not a patron you can get the full episode by visiting patreon.com/workstoppage and support us with $5 a month. On the third part of our deep dive into the history of the discipline of Cybernetics and its relations to the labor movement, we discuss the life and theories of W. Ross Ashby. His work on measurement of the complexity of a system with the concept of "Variety", helps us understand the ways complex structures, like a labor union, can be set up in ways that either give it the ability to adapt to changing inputs and become a stable, successful system, or can restrict its possible responses to a given situation and leave it unable to respond. We also discuss Stafford Beer's interpretation of Ashby's work, how it applies to economics, and the ways that thinking of complex systems like an economy in terms of variety helps us point out the differences between a capitalist and socialist economic system. On the next episode of our series, we will discuss Ashby's pioneering work on his self-regulating machine, the homeostat. Join the discord: discord.gg/tDvmNzX Follow the pod at instagram.com/workstoppage, @WorkStoppagePod on Twitter, John @facebookvillain, and Lina @solidaritybee
There are many alternative discovery procedures that are superior to market competition. Let's nurture and scale them, says Evgeny Morozov. Future Histories International Find all English episodes of Future Histories here: https://futurehistories-international.com/ and subscribe to the Future Histories International RSS-Feed (English episodes only) Collaborative Podcast Transcription If you would like to support Future Histories by contributing to the collaborative transcription of episodes, please contact us at: transkription@futurehistories.today (German) Kollaborative Podcast-Transkription FAQ: shorturl.at/eL578 Shownotes Evgeny's Website: https://evgenymorozov.com/ Evgeny on Twitter: https://twitter.com/evgenymorozov Evgeny's upcoming Podcast – The Santiago Boys: https://the-santiago-boys.com/ Morozov, Evgeny. 2019. Digital Socialism?. New Left Review vol. 116/117: https://newleftreview.org/issues/II116/articles/evgeny-morozov-digital-socialism Morozov, Evgeny. 2022. Critique of Techno-Feudal Reason. New Left Review vol. 133/134: https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii133/articles/evgeny-morozov-critique-of-techno-feudal-reason Durand, Cédric. 2022. Scouting Capital's Frontiers. New Left Review vol. 136: https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii136/articles/cedric-durand-scouting-capital-s-frontiers Morozov, Evgeny. 2021. Beyond Competition: Alternative Discovery Procedures & The Postcapitalist Public Sphere. Lecture at University of California, Berkeley: https://matrix.berkeley.edu/research-article/evgeny-morozov-beyond-competition-alternative-discovery-procedures-the-postcapitalist-public-sphere/ Morozov, Evgeny. 2014. The Planning Machine: Project Cybersyn and the origins of the Big Data nation. The New Yorker. October 13, 2014 Issue: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/13/planning-machine Morozov, Evgeny. 2013. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. Public Affairs.: https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/evgeny-morozov/to-save-everything-click-here/9781610393706/ Selected Writings (2006-2013): https://web.archive.org/web/20210202002521/http://www.evgenymorozov.com/writings.html The Syllabus: https://www.the-syllabus.com/ Further Shownotes James M. Buchanan (Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_M._Buchanan Stafford Beer (Monoskop): https://monoskop.org/Stafford_Beer Viable System Model (VSM): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_system_model "Designing Freedom" - The 1973 CBC Massey Lectures by Stafford Beer [audio]: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-1973-cbc-massey-lectures-designing-freedom-1.2946819 "Designing Freedom" - The 1973 CBC Massey Lectures by Stafford Beer [pdf via Internet Archive]: https://archive.org/details/designingfreedom00beer/mode/2up Medina, Eden. 2011. Cybernetic Revolutionaries. Cambridge: MIT Press: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/cybernetic-revolutionaries Raymond Williams: https://raymondwilliams.co.uk/about-raymond-williams/ Stefano Harney: https://egs.edu/biography/stefano-harney/ Max Weber (Monoskop): https://monoskop.org/Max_Weber Carl Menger (Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Menger Jürgen Habermas (Monoskop): https://monoskop.org/J%C3%BCrgen_Habermas Santa Fe Institute: https://www.santafe.edu/ Herbert Marcuse (Monoskop): https://monoskop.org/Herbert_Marcuse Anwar Shaikh: https://www.anwarshaikhecon.org/ Cybersyn Project Chile: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn Maslow's hierarchy of needs (Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs Posner, Eric A., and E. Glen Weyl. 2018. Radical Markets - Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society. Princeton University Press.: https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691177502/radical-markets Further Future Histories Episodes on related topics S02E31 | Thomas Swann on Anarchist Cybernetics: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e31-thomas-swann-on-anarchist-cybernetics/ S02E27 | Nick Dyer-Witheford on Biocommunism: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e27-nick-dyer-witheford-on-biocommunism/ S02E11 | James Muldoon on Platform Socialism: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e11-james-muldoon-on-platform-socialism/ S02E10 | Aaron Benanav on Associational Socialism and Democratic Planning: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e10-aaron-benanav-on-associational-socialism-and-democratic-planning/ [German] S02E07 | Simon Schaupp zu Technopolitik von unten: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e07-simon-schaupp-zu-technopolitik-von-unten/ S01E58 | Jasper Bernes on Planning and Anarchy: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e58-jasper-bernes-on-planning-and-anarchy/ [German] S01E51 | Timo Daum zur unsichtbaren Hand des Plans: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e51-timo-daum-zur-unsichtbaren-hand-des-plans/ S01E44 | Benjamin Bratton on Synthetic Catallaxies, Platforms of Platforms & Red Futurism: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e44-benjamin-bratton-on-synthetic-catallaxies-platforms-of-platforms-red-futurism-part-1-2/ [German] S01E18 | Simon Schaupp zu Kybernetik und radikaler Demokratie: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e18-simon-schaupp-zu-kybernetik-und-radikaler-demokratie/ S01E16 | Richard Barbrook on Imaginary Futures: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e16-richard-barbrook-on-imaginary-futures/ [German] S01E01 | Benjamin Seibel zu Kybernetik: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e01-benjamin-seibel-zu-kybernetik/ If you like Future Histories, you can help with your support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories? Write me at office@futurehistories.today and join the discussion on Twitter (#FutureHistories): https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast or on Mastodon: @FutureHistories@mstdn.social or on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/FutureHistories/ or on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfRFz38oh9RH73-pWcME6yw www.futurehistories.today Episode Keywords: #EvgenyMorozov, #Interview, #JanGroos, #FutureHistories, #FutureHistoriesInternational, #Cybernetics, #CyberCommunism, #Communism, #Technopolitics, #Cybersyn, #TheSantiagoBoys, #Chile, #SalvadorAllende, #StaffordBeer, #DigitalSocialism, #ImaginaryFutures, #Self-Organization, #Cybernetics, #Autonomy, #CentralControlStructure, #Decentralisation, #OrganizationalCybernetics, #CyberneticPlannedEconomy, #DigitalSocialism, #Socialism, #Anarchism, #Capitalism, #Competition,
Please support our patreon. For early and ad-free episodes, members-only content, and more.Jeremy Gross is a cybernetic tikkun olamunist living north of Boston, Massachusetts. He is interested in collaborative workspaces that incorporate peer-to-peer and empathetic practices to subsume alienated labor. We chat about his paper on Stafford Beer. But we also talk about bad incentive structures in tech, misunderstanding machine learning, and limits of AI. We go into Jewish and Yiddish culture as well as communists of that ilk. Abandon all hope ye who subscribe here. Crew:Host: C. Derick VarnAudio Producer: Paul Channel Strip ( @aufhebenkultur )Intro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesLinks and Social Media:twitter: @skepoetFacebookYou can find the additional streams on Youtube Support the show
Dimitri, Khalid, and Neuroscientist Jay (@The_Hague_ICC) continue exploring the complex history of cybernetics, including: “from electroshock to the psychedelic sixties”, Grey Walter's EEG research, the discovery of alpha/beta/delta brainwaves, the expectancy wave and readiness potential, Walter's robotic tortoises, the popularity of biofeedback today, the sus “world brain”, computer-brain interfaces for video gaming, SRI's “Changing Images of Man”, Ross Ashby, “forcing an environment to reveal itself” and the mass shooter phenomenon, feedback flicker and the Stroboscope, silk topper sicko William Seward Burroughs, Jr. and Allen Ginsberg's MK-Ultra LSD flicker experiments in Palo Alto, the California Ideology, the Dream Machine, the embrace of stroboscopic lights by Ken Kesey, Del Close, and The Grateful Dead, Stafford Beer and Chile's Project CYBERSYN, Beer's 2002 lecture about cybernetically understanding 9/11, the Satanic Panic artificial dialectic, cybernetics-as-dialectics, and counter-erming Western leftists who reject the synthesis of “parapolitical” and Historical Materialist analyses. For access to full-length premium episodes and the SJ Grotto of Truth Discord, subscribe to the Al-Wara' Frequency at patreon.com/subliminaljihad.
Thomas Swann brings together the rich tradition of anarchist self-organization with Stafford Beers Viable System Model. Future Histories International Find all English episodes of Future Histories here: https://futurehistories-international.com/ and subscribe to the Future Histories International RSS-Feed (English episodes only) Shownotes Thomas Swann at Loughborough University: https://www.lboro.ac.uk/research/crcc/about/people/thomas-swann/ Swann, Thomas. 2020. Anarchist Cybernetics: Control and Communication in Radical Politics. Bristol University Press.: https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/anarchist-cybernetics Parker, Martin, Konstantin Stoborod, Thomas Swann. 2020. Anarchism, Organization and Management: Critical Perspectives for Students. Routledge London.: https://www.routledge.com/Anarchism-Organization-and-Management-Critical-Perspectives-for-Students/Parker-Stoborod-Swann/p/book/9781138044111 Swann, Thomas. 2018. Towards an anarchist cybernetics: Stafford Beer, self-organisation and radical social movements. Ephemera Journal: theory & politics in organization, 18(4). [PDF available]: http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/towards-anarchist-cybernetics-stafford-beer-self-organisation-and-radical-social General Intellect Unit Podcast – Episode 079 - Anarchist Cybernetics, Part 1: http://generalintellectunit.net/e/079-anarchist-cybernetics-part-1/ Further Shownotes: Occupy Wallstreet Movement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street Indignados Movement in Spain: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-austerity_movement_in_Spain Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon Colin Ward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Ward Stafford Beer at Monoskop: https://monoskop.org/Stafford_Beer Viable System Model (VSM): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_system_model The VMS Guide: https://vsmg.lrc.org.uk/screen.php?page=0cybeyes "Designing Freedom" - The 1973 CBC Massey Lectures by Stafford Beer [audio]: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-1973-cbc-massey-lectures-designing-freedom-1.2946819 "Designing Freedom" - The 1973 CBC Massey Lectures by Stafford Beer [pdf via Internet Archive]: https://archive.org/details/designingfreedom00beer/mode/2up Norbert Wiener at Monoskop: https://monoskop.org/Norbert_Wiener Wiener, Norbert. 2019. Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. MIT Press. [PDF available]: https://monoskop.org/images/0/08/Wiener_Norbert_1948_Cybernetics.pdf Medina, Eden. 2011. Cybernetic revolutionaries: technology and politics in Allende's Chile. MIT Press.: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/cybernetic-revolutionaries Allenna Leonard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allenna_Leonard van Duijn, Roel. 1972. Message of a wise Kabouter. London: Duckworth.: https://libcom.org/article/message-wise-kabouter-roel-van-duijn Gordon Pask: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Pask Claude Shannon: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon Loomio: https://www.loomio.com/ Jitsi Meet: https://meet.jit.si/ Framapad: https://framapad.org/abc/ Further Future Histories Episodes on related topics [German] S02E07 | Simon Schaupp zu Technopolitik von unten: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e07-simon-schaupp-zu-technopolitik-von-unten/ S01E58 | Jasper Bernes on Planning and Anarchy: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e58-jasper-bernes-on-planning-and-anarchy/ [German] S01E51 | Timo Daum zur unsichtbaren Hand des Plans: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e51-timo-daum-zur-unsichtbaren-hand-des-plans/ S01E44 | Benjamin Bratton on Synthetic Catallaxies, Platforms of Platforms & Red Futurism: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e44-benjamin-bratton-on-synthetic-catallaxies-platforms-of-platforms-red-futurism-part-1-2/ [German] S01E18 | Simon Schaupp zu Kybernetik und radikaler Demokratie: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e18-simon-schaupp-zu-kybernetik-und-radikaler-demokratie/ S01E16 | Richard Barbrook on Imaginary Futures: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e16-richard-barbrook-on-imaginary-futures/ If you like Future Histories, you can help with your support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories? Write me at office@futurehistories.today and join the discussion on Twitter (#FutureHistories): https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast or on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/FutureHistories/ or on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfRFz38oh9RH73-pWcME6yw www.futurehistories.today Episode Keywords: #FutureHistories, #FutureHistoriesInternational, #Podcast, #JanGroos, #Interview, #ThomasSwann, #Anarchism, #Self-Organization, #Cybernetics, #Autonomy, #CentralControlStructure, #Decentralisation, #OrganizationalCybernetics, #WorkerCoopertives, #Activism, #AnarchistCybernetics, #Platforms, #StaffordBeer, #ViableSystemModel,
Trevor Hilder is an IT expert and cybernetics specialist who worked under Stafford Beer to develop the Viable System Model. Trevor joins me to explain how systems malfunction, why organisations crumble under complexity, and how to build resilient systems by infusing them with values. He explains the Viable System Model, walking us through the key components based on cybernetics and management theory.We discuss the universal laws of organising and how to apply the VSM to the climate crisis, politics and globalisation. Trevor also teaches the Viable System Model to organisations and individuals. If you're interested in learning more, email him: trevor.hilder@webofwealth.org Planet: Critical investigates why the world is in crisis—and what to do about it.© Rachel Donald Get full access to Planet: Critical at www.planetcritical.com/subscribe
In which the GIU community comes together to finish "Prospectus", the 20th and final chapter of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
In which the GIU community comes together to wrap up our discussion of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
DISCORD: discord.gg/bJtAEbFS LINKTREE: linktr.ee/AuxiliaryStatementsPodcast VSM Explainer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPnWVg7CSIg We are back in business with an ep re-discussing Stafford Beer's Viable System Model. We even spitball about how it could be applied to some kindaaaaaaa left wing political project. And I know what you're thinking...socialists being organized?! Stranger things have happened!! Reading: Diagnosing the System for Organizations (1985) by Stafford Beer
In which the GIU community comes together to discuss "Prospectus", the 20th and final chapter of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
In which the GIU community comes together to discuss "Prospectus", the 20th and final chapter of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
Stafford Beer, a cyberneticist who worked with Chile's socialist government, sought to find a balance between scale and individual autonomy in large social systems. His work sets an example for how we might accept responsibility for the internet and make it reflect the fullness of our humanity rather than reduce us to Like/Subscribe/Share cogs. Read more essays on living with technology at https://reallifemag.com and follow us on Twitter @_reallifemag.
In which the GIU community comes together to discuss "Prospectus", the 20th and final chapter of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
With "Half Earth Socialism" Drew Pendergrass and Troy Vettese want to provide a plan to save the earth and bring the good life to all. Collaborative Podcast Transcription If you would like to support Future Histories by contributing to the collaborative transcription of episodes, please contact us at: transkription@futurehistories.today (German) Kollaborative Podcast-Transkription FAQ: shorturl.at/eL578 Shownotes Drew Pendergrass‘ Website: http://www.drewpendergrass.com/ Drew on Twitter: https://twitter.com/pendergrassdrew Troy Vettese at the European University Institute: https://www.eui.eu/people?id=troy-vettese Troy on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TroyVettese Pendergrass, Drew and Vettese, Troy. 2022. "Half-Earth Socialism: A Plan to Save the Future from Extinction, Climate Change and Pandemics“. Verso Books: https://www.versobooks.com/books/3818-half-earth-socialism Further material: Wiki on Bioenergy with Carbon Capture & Storage (BECCS): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioenergy_with_carbon_capture_and_storage Wiki on Thomas Malthus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus Wiki on Malthusianism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism Wiki on Ludwig Von Mises: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises Otto Neurath at Monoskop: https://monoskop.org/Otto_Neurath Isotype (picture language developed by Otto Neurath): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotype_(picture_language) Wiki on Leonid Kantorovich: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Kantorovich Cockshott, Paul. 2010. „Von Mises, Kantorovich and in-natura calculation.“ In European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies Intervention 7(1): 167-199: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46547387_Von_Mises_Kantorovich_and_in-natura_calculation Wiki on Edward Osborne Wilson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._O._Wilson Dice Model by William Nordhaus: https://williamnordhaus.com/dicerice-models Wiki on Stafford Beer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Beer Stafford Beer at Monoskop: https://monoskop.org/Stafford_Beer Wiki on Viable System Model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_system_model Medina, Eden. 2011. "Cybernetic revolutionaries: technology and politics in Allende's Chile". Mit Press: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/cybernetic-revolutionaries "Designing Freedom" - The 1973 CBC Massey Lectures by Stafford Beer [audio]: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-1973-cbc-massey-lectures-designing-freedom-1.2946819 "Designing Freedom" - The 1973 CBC Massey Lectures by Stafford Beer [pdf via Internet Archive]: https://archive.org/details/designingfreedom00beer/mode/2up Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Wiki on the State Planning Committee (Gosplan): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosplan Wiki on János Kornai: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A1nos_Kornai Further Future Histories Episodes on related topics: S02E11 | James Muldoon on Platform Socialism: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e11-james-muldoon-on-platform-socialism/ S02E10 | Aaron Benanav on Associational Socialism and Democratic Planning: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e10-aaron-benanav-on-associational-socialism-and-democratic-planning/ S01E58 | Jasper Bernes on Planning and Anarchy: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e58-jasper-bernes-on-planning-and-anarchy/ [German] S01E51 | Timo Daum zur unsichtbaren Hand des Plan: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e51-timo-daum-zur-unsichtbaren-hand-des-plans/ S01E45 | Benjamin Bratton on Synthetic Catallaxies, Platforms of Platforms & Red Futurism (part 2/2): https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e45-benjamin-bratton-on-synthetic-catallaxies-platforms-of-platforms-red-futurism-part-2-2/ S01E44 | Benjamin Bratton on Synthetic Catallaxies, Platforms of Platforms & Red Futurism (part 1/2): https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e44-benjamin-bratton-on-synthetic-catallaxies-platforms-of-platforms-red-futurism-part-1-2/ [German] S01E19 | Jan Philipp Dapprich zu sozialistischer Planwirtschaft: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e19-jan-philipp-dapprich-zu-sozialistischer-planwirtschaft/ S01E16 | Richard Barbrook on Imaginary Futures: https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e16-richard-barbrook-on-imaginary-futures/ If you like Future Histories, you can help with your support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories? Write me at office@futurehistories.today and join the discussion on Twitter (#FutureHistories): https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast or on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/FutureHistories/ or on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfRFz38oh9RH73-pWcME6yw www.futurehistories.today Episode Keywords: #Half-Earth, #DrewPendergrass #TroyVettese #JanGroos, #FutureHistories, #Podcast, #Interview, #Socialism, #Planning, #SystemChange, #Capitalism, #Degrowth, #Democracy, #EnvironmentalCrisis, #EcologicalLimits, #Ecosocialism, #Climatemodel, #In-naturaCalculation, #LinearProgramming, #Cybernetics, #OttoNeurath, #DemocraticEconomicPlanning
In which the GIU community comes together to discuss "Prospectus", the 20th and final chapter of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
In which the GIU community comes together to discuss "Prospectus", the 20th and final chapter of Stafford Beer's "Brain of the Firm". If you like the show, consider supporting us on Patreon. Links: General Intellect Unit on iTunes http://generalintellectunit.net Support the show on Patreon https://twitter.com/giunitpod General Intellect Unit on Facebook General Intellect Unit on archive.org Emancipation Network
DISCORD: discord.gg/bJtAEbFS LINKTREE: https://linktr.ee/AuxiliaryStatementsPodcast Following up on their interview with June Reith a few weeks back, Jack and Dan decided for this show to take her advice and read Designing Freedom by business consultant and cybernetician Stafford Beer. First delivered as a series of radio lectures in 1973, designing freedom is a scathing critique of the principles of organisation that underlay contemporary social institutions and an impassioned appeal for change. Beer outlines how we might design a social system that, instead of ossification, decay and crisis, has freedom as its output. The lads also endeavor to work out how these principles might contribute to how we understand the task of setting up a socialist society and also what effective socialist organisations would look like if they we influenced by Beerian cybernetics. Text: https://monoskop.org/images/e/e3/Beer_Stafford_Designing_Freedom.pdf Audio: https://archive.org/details/DesigningFreedom_CBC_Lectures
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
